BS600 
.K98 


/  / .  I'i  /^"^ 


3Fnim  \\\t  SItbrarg  nf 

jSpqueatljeb  bg  l|tm  to 

tl|p  iljthrarg  of 

Prtnrrtnn  ®l|polo9tral  g>rmtttarg 

BS500 


NOV  141^25 


THE 

BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA 

ARTICLE    I. 

THE  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM  OF  THE  PRESENT  DAY.^ 

BY  THE  REVEREND  ABRAHAM   KUYPER,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

In  keeping  with  an  ancient  custom,  it  will  be  a  rule  at  our 
University  that  the  eixchange  of  the  rectorate  shall  be  accom- 
panied by  an  oration ;  and  it  is  preferred  that  each  rector  shall 
take  a  theme  from  his  own  department.  I  also  desire  to  ob- 
serve this  rule,  and  therefore  the  Annale  Academici  and  the 
inaugural  of  the  new  rector  are  preceded  by  this  address  on 
Present-day  Biblical  Criticism,  viewed  from  the  point  of  its 
dangerous  tendency  to  the  church  of  the  living  God.  I  am 
deeply  sensible  of  the  importance  of  the  task  imposed  on  me 
by  this  choice  of  subject;  I  feel  Avhat  modesty  is  demanded  of 
me  when  I  undertake  to  differ  from  celebrated  and  talented 
colleagues,  who  are  for  the  most  part  my  superiors;  I  know 
my  need  of  greater  courage  than  my  own  heart  prompts,  w^hen 
I  raise  my  hand  and  voice  boldly  against  current  opinions ; — 
but  may  I  refrain  when  the  dangers  that  threaten  the  church 
compel  me  to  speak?  And,  I  add,  do  you  expect  anything 
else,  when  for  several  months  past  a  reply  has  been  invited 
from  our  side  about  this  cardinal  point  in  the  conflict  of  spir- 
its ?    It  is  indeed  our  conviction  which,  with  an  appeal  to  your 

1  Translated  from  the  Dutch  by  J.  Hendrik  de  Vries,  D.  D.,  Princeton, 
New  Jersey. 

Vol.   LXI.     No.   243.     1 


410  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Ji-ily> 

considerate  judgment  but  without  the  least  uncertainty,  we 

express, — that  the  biblical  criticism  of  the  present  day  is  de- 

I  structive  of  the  best  interests  of  the  church  of  the  living  God, 

(for  the  reason  that  it  revokes  her  theology,  robs  her  of  the 
Bible,  and  destroys  her  liberty  in  Christ.  Give  me  your  atten- 
tion as,  in  the  development  of  these  three  propositions,  I  shall 
show  that  biblical  criticism  as  it  is  prosecuted  in  our  times 
at  almost  e^rery  Protestant  university  on  the  continent  of 
Europe,  must  result  in  the  utter  destruction  of  theology;  that 
it  cannot  continue  without  robbing  the  church  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures ;  and  that  it  must  end  in  surrendering  her,  utterly 
defenseless,  into  the  arms  of  the  most  unbearable,  because  in- 
tellectual, clericalism.  And  may  He,  before  whose  glory 
I  reverently  bow  and  for  the  welfare  of  whose  church  I  plead, 
be  in  this  the  inspirer  of  my  word  and  the  judge  of  my 
thoughts ;  while  in  this  sacred  task,  also,  our  help  is  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  Jehovah,  the  Rock  of  our  strength,  and 
the  Strength  of  our  life. 

I. 

Biblical  criticism  of  the  present  day  tears  the  parts  of  the- 
ology out  of  their  relation,  violates  its  character,  and  substi- 
tutes for  it  something  which  is  no  theology.  Such  is  the  three- 
fold complaint  in  which  I  treat  the  first  part  of  the  subject  in 
hand,  as  I  undertake  to  prove  the  proposition  that  present-day 
biblical  criticism  must  end  in  the  destruction  of  theology. 

Theology  is  a  science  which,  if  it  is  analogous  to  philosophy 
and  psychology,  is  distinguished  from  all  other  sciences  by 
this  fundamental  point,  that  it  does  not  occupy  itself  with  the 
knowledge  of  the  creature,  but  of  the  Creator ;  hence  of  a  God 
who,  as  creator,  cannot  be  included  in  the  range  of  the 
creaturely.  The  object  of  theology,  therefore,  is  God.  Not 
God  and  something  besides  which  is  coordinated  with  him; 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  411 

but  God  alone,  and  under  him  the  creature  is  considered  only 
in  so  far  as  it  either  instrumentally  reveals  the  knowledge  of 
God  or  for  his  glory  takes  this  knowledge  up  into  itself.  In 
anthropology,  man  is  the;  centrum,  and  the  Almighty  is  con- 
sidered only  as  the  interpretation  of  the  religious  sense ;  but  in 
theology  God  himself  is  the  centrum,  and  no  mention  of  man 
is  justified,  except  in  so  far  as  God  uses  him  for  his  own  sake.. 

Again,  in  all  other  sciences  man  observes  and  thoughtfully 
investigates  the  object,  and  subjects  it  to  himself,  but  in  the- 
ology the  object  itself  is  active ;  it  does  not  stand  open,  but 
gives  itself  to  be  seen ;  does  not  allow  itself  to  be  investigated, 
but  reveals  itself;  and  employs  thinking  man  as  instrument 
only  to  cause  the  knowledge  of  his  Being  to  radiate.  Hence 
the  confession  of  God,  the  Holy  Spirit,  speaks  of  him  also  as 
'O  ^€0X070?,  Ecclesicc  Doctor;  "  the  things  of  God  knoweth  no 
man,  but  the  Spirit  of  God,"  "  for  the  Spirit  searcheth  all 
things.  Yea,  the  deep  things  of  God  "  (1  Cor.  ii.  10)  ;  and  all 
rol  theology  is  essentially  one  beautiful  building  which,  in  all 
ages  and  among  all  nations,  has  been  reared,  according  to  a 
fixed  plan,  by  that  Spiritus  Architectonicus  whom  we,  who 
are  called  theologians,  merely  assist  as  upper  servants. 

And,  finally,  theology  is  not  born,  like  other  sciences,  from 
the  motive  of  need  or  from  the  impulse  after  knowledge,  but 
from  the  impulsion  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  giving  us  a  theology, 
God  has  a  purpose  to  fulfill.  He  wills  that  the:  knowledge  of 
his  Being  shall  be  received  by  us ;  and  that,  having  been  cast 
into  the  furrows  of  our  minds  and  hearts,  it  shall  germinate; 
and,  having  germinated,  that  it  shall  bear  fruit  to  the  honor 
of  his  name.  It  is  therefore  a  positive  science  in  which  object 
as  well  as  end  are  not  first  to  be  found,  but  are  posited  in  ad- 
vance; and  in  its  origin,  power  of  development,  and  direction 
it  is  determined  by  one  and  the  seJf-same  principle, — the  Self- 


413  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

revealing  God.  As  Thomas  puts  it,  "Deo  docetur  Deum  docet, 
ad  Deum  diicet " ;  or,  better  still,  in  the  words  of  one  of  our 
own  divines  :  "  A  theologian  is  6  ra  tov  &£ov  e«  &eov  ivcoinov 
Tov  ©eo£/  ci9  Bo^av  &€0v  Xejcov."^ 

If,  therefore,  distinction  is  made  between  the  departments 
of  theology  which  touch  its  heart  and  those  which  occupy  a 
subordinate  place,  the  division  into  principal  and  subordinate 
departments  is  determined  by  the  shorter  or  farther  distance 
of  these  departments  from  this  theological  centrum.  Hence 
;  the  heart  of  theology  is  dogmatics,  and  those  lying  farthest  off 
I  are  the  critical-literary  studies,  and,  in  fixed  consteilation  with 
j'  these,  exegesis,  pastoral  theology,  and  church  history  round 
about  the  centrum.  A  just  proportion  demands  that  the 
strength  of  the  best  theologians  and  the  best  powers  of  most 
theologians  be  devoted  to  this  central,  spiritual  labor,  and 
that  only  a  part  of  the  strength  and  a  proportionally  small  part 
of  time  be  devoted  to  the  purely  literary.  Thus  lies  the  normal 
relation  of  the  parts  as  it  is  determined  encyclopedically,  in 
virtue  of  her  principle,  by  the  nature  of  theology  itself.  And 
this  relation  is  wholly  torn  apart  by  the  present-day  biblical 
criticism ;  in  the  economy  of  theology  it  upturns  all  order ; 
makes  that  which  is  subordinate  principal ;  devotes  the  finest 
energies  to  that  which  lies  nearer  the  circumference ;  with- 
draws its  best  heads  and  best  hours  from  the  central  study  of 
theology,  and  thus  occasions  the  birth  of  a  monstrous  hydroce- 
phal.  Or,  to  express  the  same  in  a  nobler  figure,  it  is  like  a 
regal  banquet  at  which  all  the  threads  of  the  table  linens  have 
been  numbered,  and  every  spot  and  scratch  on  the  golden 
goblets  have  most  carefully  been  recorded;  while,  to  the  mor- 
tification of  the  guests,  the  sparkling  wine  is  wanting. 

1  [  This  line  of  thought  is  worked  out  more  fully  by  the  author  in  his 
Encyclopedia  of  Sacred  Theology.  New  York:  Charles  Scribner's  Sons. 
— Tr.] 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  413 

May  this  be  tolerated?    As  the  advocates  of  this  vivisection 
of  the  Scripture  repeatedly  assure  us,  the  knowledge  of  God 
rises  also  from  the  rich  life  of  nature  and  man.    Consequently 
theology  also  deals  with  the  creation.     But  what  would  we 
think  of  the  theologian,  who,  upon  arriving  at  the  point  of  the 
creation,  began  at  once,  without  any  self-restraint,  to  spend 
his  best  energy  in  the  construction  of  a  geology?     Theology 
posits  an  Incarnation  of  the  Word ;  will  our  theologians,  for 
this  reason,  preface  Christology  with  broad  physiological  and 
gynaecological  studies  of  man's  conception  and  embryonic  ex- 
istence?    Human  personality  also  charms  and  attracts  by  its 
diorama ;  does  this  make  the  man  who  spends  his  time  and 
strength  in  anatomical,  pathological,  and  physiological  studies 
a   theologian?     Must   we   work   through   the   whole   conflict 
about  materialism,  chemically  and  geologically,  microcosmic- 
ally  and  dialectically,  before  as  theologians  we  are  allowed  to 
count  with  the  soul  as  existing?    Theology  makes  confession 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  body ;  is  she  bound,  before  rejoicing 
in  her  hope,  to  trace  chemically  the  boundary  which  in  our 
body   separates    the    nutritive    from   the   organic   substratum? 
And,  not  to  mention  other  points,  theology  also  teaches  a  com- 
ing catastrophe  which  shall  bring  about  the  end  of  things ; 
must  she  analyze  by  spectral  analysis  the  component  parts  of 
all  the  planets,  in  order  that  she  may  speak  authoritatively  of 
a  burning  of  the  elements  at  the  Lord's  return?    Would  such 
a  conception  of  study  ever  form  a  theologian  ?    Would  he  who 
makes  these  things  almost  exclusively  his  studies  be  permit- 
ted to  style  himself  a  professional  theologian?     Could  it  be 
said  that  such  studies  were  governed  by  the  principle  of  the- 
ology?    Will  it  do  still  to  speak  of  theology^,  when  the  inter- 
ests  that  should   claim   the   attention  subsequent  to  this   ele- 
mentary   analysis    are    neglected    from    sheer    lack    of    time? 


414  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

And,  if  not,  can  we  still  speak  of  theology  when  not  the 
Scripture, — which  were  excellent, — but  the  introduction  to 
the  Scripture,  occupies  the  whole  heart  and  head;  when  much 
is  said  about  the  Scripture,  but  ever  so  little  from  or  upon 
the  authority  of  the  Scripture;  yes,  when  ministers,  though 
they  bear  the  title  of  theologian,  are  wholly  unacquainted  with 
thei  spiritual  life  of  their  congregations,  and,  while  almost 
opposing  their  people's  holiest  efforts,  undertake  to  satisfy 
their  own  sense  of  honor  by  covering  up  these  defects  in  elab- 
orate presentations  of  what  has  been  argued  over  and  for 
this  Bible  as  literary  substratum? 

Moreover,  this  one-sided  study  of  this  microscopic  analysis 
disables  the  eye  to  see  the  holy  synthesis.  A  chemist  is  not 
commonly  a  poet.  In  this  way  the  powers  for  real  theological 
studies  remain  undeveloped.  They  lose  their  sacred  character ; 
they  remain  barren ;  and,  what  is  worse,  they  foster  pride  rather 
than  humility.  Even  now  nothing  is  more  common  than  to 
hear  youthful  theologians,  whose  studies  have  scarcely  begun, 
whose  knowledge  of  language  and  of  antiquity  barely  suffices 
to  carry  them  along,  and  who  still  owe  the  world  the  first 
proof  of  their  higher  ability,  deprecate  the  Scriptures  in  a 
way  which  but  betrays  that  their  superficiality  echoes  what 
their  limited  powers  fail  to  grasp. 

As  results  of  this,  by  far  the  greater  part  of  the  theological 
domain  is  stili  untilled  ground ;  the  real  theological  sense  is 
dulled ;  and  most  of  those  who  call  themselves  theologians  de- 
clare their  study  already  ended  when  the  portal  which  leads 
from  the  outer  courts  to  the  sanctuarium  of  the  sancta  theo- 
logia  still  waits  their  steps. 

Though  I  readily  grant,  indeed,  that  there  must  also  be 
an  outer  court,  by  virtue  of  which  these  studies  may  and 
must  assert  their  relative  rights,  I  enter  my  protest  against 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  416. 

the  delusion  that  these  studies  render  one  a  theologian;  I 
nisist  that  these  elementary  studies  be  relegated  back  again  to 
their  proper  spheres ;  and  that  no  one  of  us  be  longer  permitted 
to  ignore  the  atrophy  of  the  higher  theology  which,  of  direful 
necessity,  has  originated  from  the  hypertrophy  of  these  lower 
studies. 

For,  and  this  was  my  second  complaint,  such  a  dispropor- 
tionate, excrescence  is  apt  to  become  a  constitutional  defect,  and 
present-day  biblical  criticism  has,  consequently,  not  only  torn 
theology  out  of  its  relation,  but  has  also  falsified  its  character. 
1  his  could  not  be  otherwise.  When  we  do  not  regulate  with 
a  clear  consciousness  the  course  of  our  studies  according  to 
the  principle  of  our  science,  that  course  of  studies  governs  us, 
raid  subjects  us  unconsciously  to  the  power  of  that  other  prin- 
ciple, from  which  the  impulse  to  this  divergence  in  the 
course  of  studies  was  born.  No  accident  put  upon  the  study 
of  the  Scripture  its  present-day  stamp.  It  was  rather  a  gen- 
eral disposition  of  the  spirits  which,  in  all  the  countries  of  Eu- 
rope, almost  simultaneously  raised  very  similar  presumptions 
against  the  Scripture.  The  Schleiermachers  and  Robertson 
Smiths,  the  Kuenens  and  Colensos,  are  but  the  most  accurate 
interpreters,  on  Scripture  grounds,  of  the  spirit  which,  as  a  re- 
former of  the  once  current  conceptions,  has  transposed  the  en- 
tire human  consciousness  in  every  department  of  life ;  even  the 
revolution  in  theology,  such  as  we  have  already  witnessed  in 
politics  and  in  social  and  domestic  relations.  Encyclopedically 
this  was  most  sharply  declared  in  the  claim  that  the  locus  de 
S.  Scripfura  should  be  removed  from  the  gable  of  dogmatics, 
and  be  given  a  place  in  the  transept  of  the  media  gratics.  It 
will  not  do  to  say  that  this  merely  implied  a  change  of  place. 
Because,  in  the  first  place,  in  dogmatics  the  media  gratice  are 


416  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

taken  officially,  hence  it  is  not  a  doctrine  of  the  Scripture,  but 
a  treatise  of  the  praedicatio  Verhi,  which,  alongside  of  the  min- 
istrations of  the  sacraments,  appears  under  this  rubric ;  as  fool- 
ish, therefore,  as  it  would  be  to  include  the  whole  Christology 
and  soteriology  under  the  locus  de  Sacramento,  just  so  untena- 
ble is  the  proposition  to  fuse  the  locus  de  S.  Scriptura  with 
what  dogmatics  teaches  concerning  the  preaching  of  the  Word. 
And,  secondly,  a  still  more  serious  objection  presents  itself. 
By  taking  away  the  locus  de  S.  Scriptura  from  the  entrance 
(introduction)  to  dogmatics,  the  ethical  tendency  has  changed 
the  very  nature  of  the  principium  of  theology.  Our  fathers 
have  ever  maintained  that  the  Scripture  was  not  one  of  many 
fountains,  but  the  principium  of  our  knowledge  of  God.  The 
fountain  of  the  knowledge  of  God,  they  said  and  very  correctly, 
is  God's  own  self-consciousness  alone ;  is  only  present  with  the 
Creator,  and  cannot  hide  in  something  creaturely;  and  exists, 
therefore,  exclusively  in  the  theologia  archetypa;  while  the 
principium  of  our  knowledge  of  God,  i.  e.,  the  principle,  the 
organic  beginning,  the  germ,  from  which  springs  all  knowl- 
edge of  God  in  the  order  of  its  parts,  and  in  which 
of  necessity  the  entire  wealth  of  theology  is  potentially 
included,  is  neither  tradition,  nor  the  Christian  consciousness, 
nor  yet  our  higher  implanted  life,  but  solely  and  alone  the  Holy 
Scripture.  Contradictory  to  this  view,  the  ethical  tendency  in 
the  present-day  study  of  the  Scriptures  has  made  the  twofold 
mistake:  first,  to  locate  the  real  source  of  the  knowledge  of 
God  in  the  implanted  life ;  and,  secondly,  as  a  simple  conse- 
quence, to  have  that  knowledge  of  God,  as  far  as  it  is  to  be- 
come conscious,  spring  from  the  unconscious  mystery  of  the 
soul;  both  these  being  philosophical  ideas,  one  from  Fichte, 
and  the  other  from  Schelling,  and  in  a  peculiar  setting 
imported    by    the    giant    mind    of    Schleiermacher    into    the 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  417 

theological  domain.  This  attacks  radically  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  whose  very  office  it  is  to  reveal  to,  in,  and  by  the 
church  conscious  knowledge  of  God  in  a  form  which  is 
adapte;d  to  our  human  consciousness.  "  The  way,  the  truth, 
and  the  life,"  are  in  Christ,  but  the  Holy  Spirit  takes  these 
from  that  Christ  "  to  show  them  unto  you  " ;  not  by  impress- 
ions on  the  conscience,  or  impulses  of  feeling,  neither  by  the 
inoculation  of  a  lymph  of  life ;  but  by  the  Word,  i.  e.  by  the 
utterance  of  the  self-consciousness  of  God,  interpreted  in  the 
form  of  our  human  consciousness.  Again,  this  error  is  a  rad- 
ical subversion  of  the  Divine  ordinances,  which  are  as  analo- 
gous to  the  realm  of  nature  as  of  grace.  For,  as  we  have  the 
series  of  a  "  perception,"  from  this  perception  a  "  thought," 
and  from  that  thought  the  "  word  "  ;  so  we  have,  also,  the  series 
of  a  "  blade,"  an  "  ear  "  and  a  "  grain  of  wheat,"  or,  if  you  like, 
the  series  of  ''  inflammable  material,"  "  smoke,"  and  "  flame." 
What  do  you  sow?  And  how  do  you  ignite  fire?  Can  you 
sow  blades  of  corn,  or  can  you  make  fire  with  smoke  ?  Indeed 
in  order  that  you  may  quicken  the  life  of  the  blade,  you  must 
needs  have  the  perfectly  ripe  grain  of  wheat ;  and,  to  ignite  fire, 
you  need  a  glowing  spark  or  flame.  In  the  same  way  it  is 
the  ordinance  of  God  in  spiritual  things,  not  to  begin  with  an 
unconscious  perception,  but  to  have  the  clearly  conscious  Word 
addressed  to  you,  from  which  Word  the  perception  shall  be  the 
first  to  germinate,  and  from  which  perception  the  thought  shall 
ripen  until  at  last  from  the  Word  a  word  of  your  own  shall  be 
born  within  you.  In  spite  of  its  praiseworthy  efforts  to  maintain 
the  confession  of  the  church,  the  ethical  tendency,  under  the 
pressure  of  the  same  philosophical  revolution-principle,  from 
which  the  present-day  biblical  criticism  borrows  its  impulse, 
has  altogether  changed  the  face  of  theology.  With  us  they 
confess  a  God  who  is  concious  of  himself,  and  consequently 


418  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

tbey  hold  to  a  Cognitio  Dei  Archetypa,  but  the  knowledge 
which  we  derive  from  the  living  God  is  in  their  system  so  little 
like  the  Ectypic,  i.  e.  which  has  originated  by  the  impress  of 
God's  self-consciousness,  as  to  be  reached  by  a  slow  process 
from  the  emotional  lifes  of  the  organs  of  revelation.  Conse- 
quently this  tendency  was  forced  to  take  God  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  "  the  family-spirit  of  the  congregation  "  to  be  synonymous, 
and,  by  the  identification  of  the  otherwise  distinguished  con- 
ceptions of  life,  power,  and  word,  to  introduce  a  Babylonian 
confusion  of  speech,  which  strangely  mixes  up  all  conceptions, 
and  lends  a  floating  character  to  every  term,  and,  after  the 
Romish  style,  allowed  a  continuous  lifei-revelation  to  become 
apparent  in  the  church,  which  at  first  took  a  place  by  the  side 
of  the  Scripture,  but  which  even  now,  with  such  men  as  Rothe, 
has  usurped  the  authority  of  the   Scripture. 

The  smooth  transition,  therefore,  from  believing  to  modern 
ethicals  is  found  with  Rothe,  von  der  Goetz,  Frank,  and 
Rabiger.  Thus  far  the  ethicals  still  reverenced  the  rule 
"  to  make  a  separation  between  the  sacred  and  the  profane 
(Ezek.  xlii.  20)  ;  and,  even  in  spite  of  their  starting-point, 
they  still  confessed  faith  in  an  absolute  chasm  between  the 
holy  and  the  unholy.  But,  and  this  is  my  third  complaint, 
from  this  same  principle,  present-day  Bible-study  has  pro- 
duced a  still  more  bitter  fruit  with  the  moderns,  and  in  the  place 
of  the  disconnected  and  grievously  degenerated  theology  has 
given  us  an  entirely  other  and  new  science.  If  there  is  no 
theologia  ectypa,  i.  e.  no  communication  of  truth  in  a  form 
appropriate  to  our  consciousness,  then,  it  was  said,  you  have 
no  right  to  value  your  perceptions  as  being  essentially  higher 
than  ours :  they  do  not  differ  specifically,  but  at  most  only  in 
degree  of  development ;  in  the  religious  life  also  there  is  a 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  419 

Darvvinistic  process.    And  thus  the  wall  of  separation  between 
the  holy  and  the  profane  fell  away;  the  chasm  between  the 
sacred  and  the  common  was  filled  in;  idolatries  were  no\y 
taken  as  the  religions  of  the  nations;  and,  together  with  the 
sacred  writings  of  other  people,  the  sacred  books  of  Israel 
were  tested  by  the  touchstone  of  all  profane  literature.     Our 
theologians  then  dispersed  into  four  different  tents  of  science : 
There  was  a  science  of  philology,  and  henceforth  its  priests 
would  take  notice  of  Semitic  literature ;  there  was  an  ethnical 
science,    and    the    science    of    religions    should  henceforth  be 
known  as  its  subdivision;  there  was  a  science  of  psychology, 
and  under  its  auspices  religious  feisling  would  be  investigated ; 
and,  finally,  there  was  a  science  of  philosophy,  whose  task  it 
now  became  to  furnish  a  philosophy  of  religion.     Thus  along- 
side of,  and  over  against,  sacred  theology,  there  arose  an  en- 
tirely other  and  separate  science,  no  longer  of  God,  but  of 
religion.     And  the  grievance  of  the  church  of  Christ  is,  that 
this  brand-new  "  science  of  religion  "  committed  the  lamenta- 
ble act  of  dishonestly  announcing  itself  by  the  old  name  of 
"  theology,"   and,   while  expeiling   sacred   theology,   which   it 
had  at  first  ignored,  altogether  from  the  domain  of  the  state- 
faculty,  now  carries  itself  as  though  it  were  the  only  lawful 
tenant,  yea,  owner,  of  the  ancient  sacred  house.     Hence  our 
complaint  against  you,  v/ho,  as  our  brethren  making  confes- 
sion of  the  name  of  Jesus,  have  cooperated  to  effect  this  change, 
is  not  merely  that  you  have  mutilated  theology  and  have  al- 
lowed it  to  be  falsified ;  but  much  more  that,  by  the  abandon- 
ment of  dogmatics  and  practical  theology,  you  have  allowed 
the  heart  and  the  brain  of  the  sancta  theologia  to  be  removed, 
in  order,  as  a  soulless  mummy  embalmed  with  spices,  to  have 
it  laid  away  in  the  modern  sarcophagus. 

See,  my  brethren,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  this  pains  us; 


420  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July> 

it  grieves  us  that,  with  your  leave,  the  profane  "science  of 
reHgion  "  has  been  allowed  to  ascend  the  throne  of  the  sancta 
theologia,  and  that  as  willing  priests  you  offer  it  the;  services 
of  your  splendid  talents,  and  as  willing  choir-boys  bring  to  it 
the  incense  of  your  homage.  For  this  makes  the  churches  of 
the  living  God  to  suffer  loss.  If,  indeed,  you  cannot  destroy 
them  as  churches,  you  can  injure  their  well-being.  And  this 
is  being  done.  According  to  the  Lord's  ordinance,  a  theology 
belongs  to  the  church  in  the  earth.  She  cannot  live  without 
it.  Where  she  is  deprived  of  it  she  must  languish.  She  needs 
a  theology  that  she  might  grasp  the  more  hidden  sense  of  God's 
Word;  that  she  might  discover  the  deflection  of  the  line  of 
error;  to  protect  the  medical  art  of  the  soul  from  passing  into 
a  spiritual  quackery ;  to  exhibit  thei  reasonableness  of  her  faith 
and  as  apologete  to  plead  for  it.  The  church  needs  a  theology 
that  she  might  be  inwardly  edified,  and  kept  from  error, 
and  be  able;  to  command  m^oral  confidence  from  the  learned  and 
unlearned  alike.  In  brief,  she  needs  a  theology  which,  while 
it  differs  not  specifically,  but  only  gradually,  from  the  knowl- 
edge of  sacred  things  on  the  part  of  the  laity,  does  not  stand 
outside  of  it,  but  in  the  service  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  blooms 
and  flourishes  with  it  upon  one  root;  which,  joined  to  her 
past,  directs  the  course  of  former  thought  into  the  chan- 
nels of  our  days ;  and  which,  by  virtue  of  that  origin,  trains 
ministers  who  do  not  move  as  exalted  creatures  in  an  atmos- 
phere above  the  people,  but  dwell  among  them  as  their  spirit- 
ual noblemen,  who  in  but  purer  and  finer  forms  cause  to  shine 
forth  what  is  her  life;  and  that  of  her  children.  And  this  you 
withhold  from  the  churches,  you  vivisectors.  By  your  pres- 
ent-day studies  of  the  Scriptures,  you  cause  the  church  to  be 
deprived  of  it.  You  offer  her  a  science  which  has  no  connec- 
tion with  her  confession,  and  you  send  her  pastors  who,  how- 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  421 

ever  learned  and  reverend,  if  in  other  ways  they  are  serious, 
must  confess  shamefacedly  their  ignorance  of  the  things  of  the 
Spirit,  and,  instead  of  feeding  the  church,  must  needs  be  fed 
and  warmed  by  her.  And  so  it  is  no  wonder,  that  diseases  in 
the  church  are  on  the  increase  hand  over  hand,  that  sects  are 
multiplying,  that  practice  does  not  follow  the  teaching,  and 
that  "  shepherd  and  flock,"  distrustful  of  each  other,  stand 
mutually  opposed,  instead  of  unitedly  enjoying  the  glory  of 
Jesus'  name.  Even  society  at  large,  yes  the  country,  suf- 
fers by  it.  For  a  spiritual  circle  which  finds  its  image  in  a 
marsh,  instead  of  in  a  clear  lake,  throws  out  of  necessity  poi- 
sonous vapors,  which  spoil  the  national  spirit.  By  robbing 
the  church  of  her  theology,  she  is  robbed  also  of  that  wonder- 
ful power  of  thought  which  made  us  Calvinists  for  ages 
together  an  invincible  stronghold  in  the  midst  of  the  land; 
and,  by  presenting  wandering  ethical  ideas  in  the  stead  of  the 
nourishing  bread  of  practical  theology,  discipline  and  order 
are  undermined,  and  the  moral  sense  of  justice  is  weakened. 
And  therefore,  in  behalf  of  that  misappreciated  and  the- 
ology-robbed church,  we  have  planted  in  this  new  University 
a  slip  of  the  old  plant,  with  the  prayer  that  God  may  give  it 
increase.  Our  aim  was  not  to  place  a  better  theology  by  the 
side  of  one  less  good,  but,  where  there  was  none,  to  plant  one 
anew,  however  imperfectly  its  form.  For  consider  it  well,  at 
the  state  universities  there  is  no  longer  any  theology.  It  is 
lost.  A  science  of  religion  has  taken  its  place,  a  science  of  an 
altogether  other  caliber,  but  which  the  state,  less  honestly,  at 
the  price  of  misleading  the  church  of  God,  carries  under  the 
name  of  the  old  firm.  Hence  our  faith  in  our  future,  what- 
ever storms  may  be  gathering  over  our  heads ;  but  hence  also 
the  bitter  opposition  we  meet  with  from  our  brethren.  For 
nothing  disturbs  peace  of  mind  so  much  as  want  of  courage 


422  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Jwly, 

to  break  off  from  what  has  become  a  temptation.  And  the 
state-faculties  are  a  temptation;  a  temptation  to  all  Christian 
brethren  who  are  not  wholly  weaned  from  homage  to  this 
officially  scientific  world ;  a  temptation  to  Christian  parents 
who,  however  warm  and  earnest  in  their  prayers  for  their  sons, 
are  anxious  to  choose  for  them  the  way  that  is  socially  safest; 
and  a  temptation  no  less  to  our  young  men  who  desire  to 
become;  ministers  of  God's  word.  For  you  know  that  from  that 
"  faculty  without  theology  "  there  runs  a  path  to  the  church 
that  has  been  made  entirely  smooth  and  straight.  While  with 
us,  who  have  reinstated  the  sancta  theologia  in  its  former 
honor,  one  is  to  all  appearances  surrounded  by  a  wall  without 
any  means  of  escape. 

II. 

After  the  encyclopedic  there  follows  the  dogmatic  side  of 
the  question.  For  the  biblical  criticism  of  the  present  day, 
according  to  r.vy  second  point,  does  not  merely  withhold  the- 
ology from  the  congregations,  but,  what  is  worse,  it  robs  them 
of  their  Bible. 

When  do  the  congregations  have  a  Bible  and  when  not? 
Allow  me  to  speak  of  this  holy  matter  plainly  as  a  day-laborer, 
because  the  Holy  Scripture  is  a  divine  jewel  common  to  the 
day-laborer  and  professor.  And  then,  I  say  it  frankly  and  un- 
hesitatingly, to  us  Christians  of  the  Reformed  faith,  the  Bible 
is  the  Word  and  the  Scripture  of  our  God.  When  in  private 
or  at  the  family-altar  I  read  the  Holy  Scripture,  neither  Moses 
nor  John  addresses  me,  but  the  Lord  my  God.  He  it  is  who 
then  narrates  to  me  the  origin  of  all  things  and  the  calamitous 
fall  of  man.  God  tedls  me  with  silent  majesty  how  he  has  ap- 
pointed salvation  to  our  fallen  race.  I  hear  him  himself  re- 
late the  wonders  which  he  wrought  for  our  deliverance  and 
that  of  the  people  of  his  choice,  and  hov/,  when  that  people 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  423 

rebelled  against  him,  he  afflicted  them  in  his  wrath,  and  when 
chastened  restored  them  again  to  his  favor,  the  whilst  they 
sought  the  day  of  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  his  love.  In  the 
midst  of  that  sacred  history  I  hear  the  Holy  Spirit  singing  to 
my  spiritual  ear  in  the  Psalms,  which  discloses  the  depths  of 
my  own  soul ;  in  the  prophets  I  hear  him  repeat  what  he 
whispered  in  the  soul  of  'Israel's  seers ;  and  in  which  my  own 
soul  is  refreshed  by  a  perspective  which  is  most  inspiring  and 
beautiful.  Till  at  length,  in  the  pages  of  the  Niew  Testament, 
God  himself  brings  out  to  me  the  Expected  One,  the  Desire 
of  the  fathers ;  shows  me  the  place  where  the  manger  stood ; 
points  out  to  me  the  tracks  of  his  footsteps ;  and  on  Golgotha 
lets  me  see,  how  the  Son  of  his  unique  love,  for  me  poor  doomed 
one,  died  the  death  of  the  cross.  And,  finally,  it  is  the  same  God, 
the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  as  it  were,  reads  off  to  me  what  he  caused 
to  be  preached  by  Jesus'  disciples  concerning  the  riches  of  that 
cross,  and  closes  the  record  of  this  drama  in  the  Apocalypse 
with  the  enchanting  Hosanna  from  the  heaven  of  heavens. 
Call  this,  if  you  will,  an  almost  childish  faith,  outgrown  by 
your  larger  wisdom.  But  I  cannot  better  it.  Such  is  my  Bible 
to  me,  and  such  it  was  in  the  bygone  ages,  and  such  it  is  still, 
the  Scripture  of  the  church  of  the  living  God.  The  human 
authors  must  fall  away ;  in  the  Bible  God  himself  must  tell 
the  narrative,  sing,  prophesy,  correct,  comfort,  and  jubilate 
in  the  ear  of  the  soul.  The  majesty  of  the:  Lord  God  is  the 
point  in  question,  and  that  only.  If  then  the  Scripture:  has 
spoken,  all  controversy  is  ended ;  when  it  affirms,  the  latest 
doubt  departs ;  even  the  habit  of  turning  to  the  Scriptures,  in 
times  of  need  or  despair,  for  help  and  direction  from  God, 
seems  to  me  by  no  means  unlawful,  but  a  precious  usage. 
Thus  I  stand  with  x\ugustine,  and  with  Comrie,  who  entirely 
along  his  lines  exclaimed :     "  When  I  read  the  Scripture,  I 


424  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

listen  to  what  God  speaks  to  me;  and,  when  I  pray,  God  lis- 
tens to  what  I  stammer." 

This  does  not  mean  that  the  church  looks  for  something 
extraordinary  in  that  Book  as  such.  A  "vis  siipernaturalis 
sacra  scriptiircu  inhcerens/'  such  as  the  Lutheran  faculties 
taught  over  against  Rathman,  and  such  as,  alas !  among  our- 
selves is  maintained  by  some,  is  inconceivable  for  the  Calvin- 
ist.  To  him  the  holy  book  is  as  the  deep  water  in  the  dia- 
mond. As  long  as  that  precious  stone  lies  on  the,  table  in  its 
dark  state,  the  most  beautiful  diamond  can  scarcely  be  dis- 
tinguished from  a  worthless  piece  of  glass.  Value  is  imparted 
to  it  only  by  the  inshining  of  the  light.  In  this  way  the  Scrip- 
ture becomes  the  Holy  Scripture  only  when  the  Holy  Spirit 
sends  forth  his  reflections,  which  causes  God,  the  omnipresent 
God,  to  address  my  soul  in  and  through  that  book.  If  the 
figure  of  speech  were  not  profane,  I  would  say,  that,  even  as 
the;  telephone  is  a  speaking  from  the  distance,  such  is  that 
book  of  the  Testaments  to  me.  If  now  I  enter  into  relations 
with  that  book,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  works  his  illumination, 
then  is  my  soul  joined  to  my  God,  and  my  God  to  my  soul, 
and  the  speech  of  the  Eternal  One  begins.  Every  idea  of  a 
something  accidental  in  the  Scripture  is  thus  excluded.  It 
did  not  originate  of  itself,  but  it  v/as  brought  about  after  a 
fixed  plan.  The  eternal  counsel  of  God  contained  the  original, 
the  faint  copy  of  which  is  given  us  in  the  Scripture.  "  I  have 
known  of  old,"  sings  the  Psalmist,  "  concerning  thy  testimo- 
nies "  "  that  thou  hast  established  them  forever."  The  soil 
in  whicH  it  was  to  develop  itself  was  expressly  prepared;  in 
the  germ  from  which  it  was  to  grow  lay  the  protoplasm  of 
its  full  glory.  It  is  the  living  stone,  firm,  solid  as  stone,  and 
yet  seething  with  life.  They  who  wrote  it  did  not  write  it 
for  their  own  sakes,  but  for  the  church  of  God,  for  which  it 


190-1.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  435 

was  intended.  "  That  not  unto  themselves,  but  unto  us,  they 
did  minister  the  things  "  i.  e.  for  the  church  of  God  of  all 
ages ;  so  that  at  the  end  of  the  dispensation  of  miracles,  Al- 
mighty God  would  be  able  to  speak  to  and  through  his  church 
with  indeclinable  certainty  in  the.  highest  form,  viz.  in  that  of 
the  Conscious  Word.  I  grant  you,  this  is  not  a  definition  :  at 
most  it  is  but  a  refection  out  of  my  own  soul  for  the  sake  of 
communicating  the  impression  of  the  Scripture-mystery.  For 
the  Scripture-secret  is  a  mystery,  equally  wonderful  and  impen- 
etrable as  the  creation  in  the  beginning,  the  incarnation  in  the 
midst  of  the  ages,  and  thei  final  catastrophe  which  still  tarries. 
Wonderful,  not  for  the  sake  of  the  book  itself,  but  because 
here  also  it  is :  God  touching  the  finite,  and  the  wave-beat  of 
the  eternal  broken  upon  what  is  devoid  of  all  power  that  in- 
sures continuance  of  being. 

If  now  the  question  is  raised  by  what  name  the  church  of 
the  living  God  has  been  accustomed  to  designate  this  mode 
of  origination  of  the  Scripture,  we  reply :  "  Inspiration,  the- 
opneusty,  by  the  Holy  Spirit."  From  the  nature  of  the  case 
tliis  Scripture-theopneusty  concerns  a  somewhat  different  ques- 
tion from  that  other  inspiration,  which  was  merely  the  vehicle 
of  revelation.  This  is  not  said  to  evade  a  difficulty.  Candidly 
spoken,  I  also  belong  to  those  backward  ones  who  stand  im- 
movably convinced  that  God  wrote  the  law  himself  upon  the 
tables  of  stone,  spake  himself  with  audible  voice  from  Sinai, 
appeared  in  the  theophanies,  sent  angels  to  comfort  sinners, 
and,  as  the  wonderful  worker  for,  to,  and  in  Israel,  of  wonder- 
ful things,  surely  also  foretold  to  man  in  prophecy  what  he, 
the  Almighty  One,  thought  of  man,  and  purposed  with  the 
children  of  men.  That  all  that  relates  to  revelation  is  passed 
over  in  this  paper,  is  therefore  done  least  of  all  from  fear; 
Vol.    LXI.      No.    243.      2 


426  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

but  only  for  the  sake  of  clearness.  For  revelation  could 
have  been  given,  and  could  still  have  be'en  continued,  without 
there  ever  having  been  prepared  a  theopneustic  Scripture. 
Imagine  that  revelation  worked  out  in  its  course,  without  any- 
thing more,  and  there  is  nothing  of  the  Scripture  itself  yet 
existent ;  then  that  Scripture  is  still  to  come ;  it  is  still  to  come 
about  after  a  fixed  purpose ;  by  a  plan  which  includes  also  the 
means  by  which  that  Scripture  should  be  wrought  and  formed, 
and  this  wondrous  means  the  church  calls  "  the  theopneusty." 
It  is  possible,  though  I  do  not  afifirm  it,  that  in  olden  times 
still  other  mighty  miracles  took  place;  which  have  not  been  re- 
corded; it  is  certain  that  important,  effective  prophetical  ad- 
dresses were  made,  of  which  the  Scripture  makes  no  mention ; 
we  know  that  Jesus  spoke  and  did  many  things  of  which  we 
have  no  report;  also  that  the  Apostles  spoke  and  wrote  what 
has  not  been  handed  down  to  us ;  but  all  this,  however  pre- 
cious it  must  have  been  to  Israel  and  the  early  Christian 
churches,  does  not  touch  the  Scripture  as  the  Scripture  of  the 
Church  of  God.  For  the  Scripture  brings  us  from  that  revela- 
tion only  that  much  and  just  so  much  as  was  determined  by 
God  to  be  kept  in  the  permanent  organism  of  the  Conscious 
Word  for  the  church  of  all  ages.  No  accident  regulated  what 
was  admitted  into  it  and  excluded  from  it.  It  was  the  fixed 
choice  of  God  which  directed  itself  after  the  need  of  the  souls 
of  God's  elect  and  the  wants  of  the  church  of  Christ,  knov/n 
from  eternity,  and  therefore  satisfying  for  all  ages.  It  is  a 
mystery  of  love  and  comfort  which  can  be  explained  only 
when  each  and  every  writer,  whose  inestim.able  grace  and  hon- 
or it  was  to  record  a  larger  or  smaller  part  of  that  Scripture, 
v/as  not  his  own  master  in  the  writing,  but  only  rendered  ser- 
vice as  an  instrument  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  was  so  wrought 
upon  and  directed  by  the  Koly  Ghost,  that  the  page  of  Scrip- 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  427 

ture,  which,  after  pencil  and  pen  had  been  laid  aside,  lay  before 
him,  contained  and  was  possessed  of  equal  fixedness,  as  though 
it  had  originated  by  an  immediate,  divine  creation. 

How  are  we  to  interpret  this  ?  Does  this  mean  to  say  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  could  have  used  Abiram  for  this  wondrous 
task  as  well  as  Moses,  Saul  with  equal  safety  as  David,  Judas 
Iscariot  equally  well  as  John?  This  is  the  way  in  which  it 
has  been  preseinted,  and,  if  compelled  to  do  so,  I  myself  would 
not,  even  in  this,  determine  a  limitation  to  the  almightiness 
of  God.  God  can  raise  children  unto  Abraham  also  from  the 
stones  of  the  street ;  and  the  prophecy  of  Balaam,  the  number- 
ing of  Saul  with  the  prophets,  and  the  redemption-idea  on  the 
lips  of  Caiaphas,  amply  show,  that,  if  needs  be,  the  Holy  Spir- 
it has  this  power  also  at  his  disposal.  But  it  is  quite  another 
question  whether  the  Holy  Spirit  has  willed  to  work  the  the- 
opneusty  in  such  a  magical  v/ay.  And  this  we  answer  in  the 
negative.  On  the  contrary,  theopneusty  appears  to  consist 
in  this,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  temporarily  took  away  from  the 
human  spirit  the  immediate  disposal  of  the  operation  of  his 
"  spirit,  soul,  and  body " ;  which  he  then  from  within  out 
assumed  himself ;  and  in  such  a  way  that,  in  the  measure  in 
which  man  was  spiritually  disposed,  the  Holy  Spirit  operated 
in  and  by  the  human  spirit,  or  even  repressed  the  human  spirit 
wholly.  H  for  a  moment  I  may  speak  of  the  human  sensor- 
ium  as  the  wheels,  and  the  human  spirit  the  axle,  then  the 
mystery  consists  in  this,  that  in  theopneusty  the  Holy  Spirit 
either  turned  the  axle  at  his  pleasure,  or  lifted  that  axle  out 
and  acted  himself  in  the  place  of  it.  Compare  Daniel  at  the 
Hiddekel  with  thel  man  of  Tarsus,  and  the  distinction  I  refer 
to  will  be  clear.  No  idle  speculations  on  the  different  styles 
of  the  writers  or  the  characters  peculiar  to  their  circle  of 


428  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

thought  need  detain  us.  By  the  constant  usage  of  another  in- 
strument, the  result  must  be  different.  And  that  not  by  acci- 
dent, for  the  Holy  Spirit  did  not  chose  his  instrument  for  this 
glorious  work  only  at  the  given  moment,  but  created  and  pre- 
pared such  an  instrument  already  in  the  succession  of  the  gen- 
erations, b}'  tlie  forming  of  heart  and  brains,  in  the  manner  of 
education,  the  leading  of  the  daily  life,  and  mostly  also  by  in- 
ward grace. 

To  narrate  history,  the  Holy  Spirit  used  an  instrument  in 
which  the  memory  of  facts  was  present,  and  in  whose  spiritual 
periphery,  if  I  may  say  so,  were  found  the  scrolls  and  docu- 
ments and  all  necessary  data.  To  sing  psalms  for  the  church 
of  the  living  God,  the  Holy  Spirit  did  not  employ  a  prosaic 
caviler,  but  a  poetic  spirit,  which  itself  was  deeply  shaken, 
moved,  down-trodden,  and  which  heroically  lifted  itself  up 
in  the  Spirit.  In  like  manner,  for  the  apostolic  gnosis,  the 
Holy  Spirit  did  not  choose  a  Thomas  but  a  Paul ;  not  a  Thad- 
deus,  but  a  Simon  Bar-jonas ;  not  an  Andrew  who  stood  afar 
■off,  but  a  John  whose  head  reclined  on  Jesus'  bosom.  Hence 
the  only  point  in  question,  therefore,  is  that  of  psychical  analy- 
sis ;  whether,  indeed,  the  human  person  was  framed  to  serve, 
such  as  he  is,  wnth  all  the  knowledge  which  he  himself  pos- 
sesses, as  the  organ  of  another  spirit.  And  this  is  possible ; 
people  can  be  possessed  of  other  spirits.  A  strange  spirit  can 
speak  through  one  so  possessed.  The  Gospels  tell  us  this 
definitely,  and  I  myself  have  heard  this  double  speaking  in 
one  possessed  of  frenzy.  If  now  our  spirits  are  susceptible 
to  possession  by  evil  spirits,  why  not  also  by  good;  and  if  by 
•_good,  why  not  then  by  the  Holy  Spirit  ?  The  "  est  Dens  in 
nobis,  agitante  calescimus  illo  " ;  all  the  gifts  of  genius ;  all 
relal  powers  of  poetry  and  art;  also  the  several  forms  of 
divination,  show   that  another  spirit   can  achieve   something 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  429 

in  ours.  Even  among  us  there  are  sometimes  spirits  who 
capture  and  hold  other  spirits  so  entirely  in  their  powers  that 
they  use  them  literally  as  their  own  doubles,  or  who,  stronger 
still,  multiply  their  own  spirit  a  thousand  fold  in  whole  com- 
panies of  men.  Think  of  a  Napoleon  at  Austerlitz.  Is  it 
not  the  spirit  of  that  one  man  of  short  stature  which  thexe 
causes  the  whole  phalanx  of  his  generals,  and  the  many  thou- 
sands of  horsemen,  to  turn  as  one  mighty  wheel  about  the 
pivot  of  his  will  ?  And  if  in  these  several  domains,  by  anal- 
ogy, it  appears  possible  to  render  a  human  psychical  and 
physical  being,  by  the  entering  in  of  another  spirit  in  his 
spirit,  serviceable  to  the  will  of  that  other  spirit,  why  then 
should  the  possibility  be  disputed  that  God  the  Holy  Spirit 
does  this  same  thing  in  a  divine,  i.  e,  absolute  sense.  "  The 
Holy  Spirit,"  says  Jesus,  will  bring  to  mind " ;  is  not  that 
an  intellectual  capacity  to  employ  the  memory  in  one's  im- 
mediate service  ?  And  would  not  that  same  Holy  Spirit  be 
able  equally  easily  and  surely  to  introduce  new  and  conscious 
thoughts  into  the  human  spirit?  You  yourself  are  able  to 
transmit  conscious  thoughts  into  the  mind  of  another.  To 
accomplish  this  you  speak.  But  what  is  "  speaking "  other 
than  a  passing  on  of  the  thought  from  your  heart  in  the  vi- 
bration of  air-waves?  and  what  the  voice,  and  those  vibra- 
tions of  air-waveis,  other  than  conductors  along  which  your 
thought  is  carried  to  the  auditory  nerve  of  the  person  ad- 
dressed? and  what  is  this  auditory  nerve  in  turn  but  a  con- 
ductor or  wire  along  which  your  thought  is  introduced  into 
the  spirit  of  that  other  man?  Your  motor-nerves  which  set 
in  motion  the  muscle  of  your  organ  of  speech,  the  air-waves 
which  were  set  to  vibrate  by  these  muscles,  the  sensorial  audit- 
ory-nerves of  the  ether  which  were  affected  by  these  vibrations 
and  passed  them  on  to  his  spirit,  are  altogether  nothing  else 


430  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

than  leaders  which  you  employ  to  repeat  the  impression  of 
your  spirit  in  the  spirit  of  the  other,  so  that  the  same  clear, 
conscious,  and  full-orbed  thought  arises  in  him  which  at  first 
was  only  in  you,  and  which  only  now  has  come  to  him.  And 
why  then  should  not  the  Holy  Spirit,  who,  after  all,  is  not 
bound  to  these  intermediate  links  of  nerves,  air-waves,  and 
muscles, — why  should  not  the  Holy  Spirit  not  be  able  to  do 
immediately  what  we  are  able  to  do  mediately,  and,  enter- 
ing in  within  us,  transplant  entirely  conscious,  new,  and 
full-orbed  thoughts  from  himself  into  our  spirit?  Hence  I 
take  the  writers  as  entirely  instrumentally  in  the  service  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  including  everything  they  knew,  together 
with  the  entire  result  of  their  previous  training,  even  to  their 
surroundings  and  credentials,  and  maintain  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  has  used  this  whole  person,  with  everything  belonging 
to  him,  to  remind  in  and  through  him,  to  sift,  to  purge,  to 
think,  to  write;  but  also,  alongside  of  this,  that  without  any 
intermediaries  of  motor  or  sensor  nerves,  and  hence  also 
without  inflection  of  the  muscles  of  speech,  or  the  vibration 
of  the  air-wave,  the  Holy  Spirit  communicated  new,  consci- 
ous, clear  thoughts  to  them.  That  God  also  spoke  with  audi- 
ble voice  is  sufficiently  shown  by  Sinai  and  Tabor.  But  this 
is  not  the  que-stion  with  the  inspiration  of  the  Scripture;  this 
was  inspiration  by  the  entering  in  of  the  Spirit  into  the  cen- 
trum of  the  personality  of  the  writers,  and  an  absolute  sub- 
jection of  what  was  in  and  belonged  to  them  to  the  sovereignty 
of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

By  this  the  rationalistic  pretext  which  separates  between 
"  Scripture  "  and  "  Word  of  God  "  even  as  the  present-day 
protest  against  the  inspiration  of  the  words,  is  judged  of  it- 
self. The  Scripture  is  God's  word  both  as  a  whole  and  in  its 
parts.     Synthetically,  because  the  extent  and  the  content  of 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  431 

the  Holy  Scripture  in  its  organic  resumption  has  God  for  their 
author  and  is  given  to  the  church  as  type  of  the  incarnation. 
The  Scripture,  however,  is  also  God's  word  analytically,  i.  e. 
in  each  of  its  parts;  not  because,  each  of  these  parts  brings 
us  a  new  thought  of  God  in  a  divine  form,  but  because  the 
actual  thoughts  of  God  as  well  as  the  thoughts  of  men,  and 
even  those  of  Satan  in  so  far  as  the  Scripture  writes  them 
down  for  us,  yea,  every  song  and  every  narrative  of  the  Bible, 
even  of  what  the  godless  have  dared  to  undertake  against 
God  Almighty,  is  here  placed  before  us,  not  with  the  uncer- 
tainty of  the  human,  but  under  the  infallible  credential  of 
the  divine,  i.  e.  of  the  word  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  latest 
dogmatists  in  Germany  abandon  more  and  more  the  idea  of 
an  inspiration  which  concerns  the  thoughts,  but  not  the  words. 
Rothe  declares :  "  On  the  whole,  words  and  thoughts  are 
inseparable."  There  are  no  thoughts  without  words;  they 
cannot  be  expressed  and  held  fast  otherwise  than  in  words 
and  by  means  of  w'ords."  Even  the  moderns  do  not  deny  this 
any  longer.  It  was  indeed  pure  "  thoughtlessness,"  as  Rothe 
called  it,  to  advocate  an  inspiration  of  the  thoughts  and  to 
deny  the  inspiration  of  the  words.  He  who  does  this  is  not 
a  thinker,  let  alone  a  psychologist.  No,  as  often  as  the  Holy 
Spirit  entered  a  human  personality,  in  order  to  use  him  as 
instrument  for  the  writing  of  a  page  of  Scripture,  the  end 
could  not  be  reached  save  as  either  the  thoughts  that  were 
already  in  him  or  those  that  were  newly  inspired  first  entered 
into  his  human  consciousness.  No  thought  can  enter  into 
our  consciousness  but  of  itself  it  puts  on  the  garment  of  rep- 
resentations and  conceptions.  And  again  they  cannot  come 
forth  out  of  this  consciousness  upon  paper  save  in  the  form 
of  words  and  syntax.  If  the  Holy  Spirit  gave  the  thoughts 
only,  and  left  the  task  of  expression  to  man,  all  certainty 


432  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

would  be  lost.  But,  no,  the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was 
not  by  halves,  it  went  on;  and  as  he  was  able  to  enter  the 
spirit  of  man,  he  equally  governed  the  human  consciousness, 
and  efifected  the  transition  from  thoughts  into  conceptions, 
and  from  these  conceptions  into  words ;  and  only  when  his 
thoughts  stood  written  down  on  the  parchment  did  the  Holy 
Spirit  rest  from  this  his  glorious  work,  and  saw  that  it  was 
good.  Hence  it  was  also  a  verbal  inspiration, — not  mechanic- 
ally by  whispering  into  the  fleshly  ear,  but  organically  by  call- 
ing forth  the  words  from  man's  own  consciousness,  i.  e.  by 
employing  all  those  words  which  were  on  hand  in  the  spirit- 
ual sensorium  of  the  writer.  Even  as  the  child  of  God  con- 
fesses :  "  God  works  absolutely  in  my  personality  every  good 
thing  (deed,  word,  and  intention),  and  at  the  same  time  I 
work  all  things  myself,  walking  in  the  works  which  God  has 
prepared  for  me, " ;  the  author  of  Scripture  may  confess : 
"  The  Holy  Spirit  inspires  absolutely  every  thought  and  every 
word  in  me,  and  yet  I  write  every  word  myself,  studying  the 
meaning  of  the  words  which  God  has  prepared  for  his 
church."  It  also  applies  therefore  to  the  form  of  the  Scrip- 
ture: ovK  ev  8iSaKTol<i  avdpoo7rLvrj<;  ao^ia<i  \6yoi,<i  aXV  el  8i8aK- 
Toi^  djiov  rrvevixaro'i,  TrvevfiaTiKoh  TTvev/XTtKa  av<yKpivovTe<i, 
i.  e.  a  content  inspired  within  me  by  the  Spirit,  and  given 
back  in  the  words  which  the  Spirit  pressed  out  of  me.  Hence 
the  result  is,  that,  apart  from  the  question  whether  the  writers 
realize  it  or  not,  by  them  as  instruments  a  book  or  song  or 
epistle  was  written,  which  in  its  original  form,  i.  e,.  as  auto- 
graphon,  bare  in  itself  the  infallible  authority  of  having  been 
wrought  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

And    this    is    the    point    in    question    which    concerns    the 
church  of  the  living  God.     There  may  be  some  incoherence 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  433 

in  the  theory  of  inspiration,  the  words  employed  in  describing 
it  may  be  ill-chosen ;  all  this  is  nothing  as  long  as  the  fact  of 
inspiration  remains  untouched  and  its  result  immovable.  The. 
divine  fixedness  over  against  the  uncertainty  of  all  human 
ponderings,  is  chiefly  that  which  makes  the  Holy  Scripture 
"  holy,"  i.  e.  a  bible  for  the  church  of  God.  Hence  the  ques- 
tion which,  in  view  of  the  Scripture-study  of  the  present  day, 
presents  itself  is  not,  whether  it  gathers  about  itself  other 
hypotheses  concerning  the  mystery  of  the  inspiration  of  the 
Scripture,  nor  whether  it  modifies  the  judgment  about  the 
Scriptures  from  the  literary  view-point,  but  only  and  ex- 
clusivel)%  whether  it  leaves  us  in  the  possession  of  such  an 
inspiration  of  the  Scripture,  whose  result  offers  us  for  its 
entire  content  the  unweakened  guarantee  of  divine  certainty. 
From  the  view-point  of  the  modern  tendency  this  is  scarce- 
ly any  longer  a  question  as  such.  The  moderns  without  dis- 
tinction antagonize  with  one  accord  such  a  view  of  the  Scrip- 
ture as  a  fruit  of  superstition,  and  make  it  a  point  of  honor  to 
impress  it  deeply  upon  the  congregations  that  such  a  Holy 
Scripture  never  existed,  save  in  the  imagination  of  the  cred- 
ulous. No  further  word  of  them  is  therefore  necessary.  But 
we  cannot  pass  those  by  who  have  erected  their  tent,  midway 
between  the  moderns  and  ourselves,  and  whose  banner  car- 
ries the  ethical  symbol.  For  with  these  learned  men  the 
strange  phenomenon  appears  that,  according  to  the  impression 
of  the  church,  no  less  decisively  than  the  moderns,  they 
abolish  the  Holy  Scripture  as  a  book  of  divine  authority,  and 
at  the  same  time  personally,  in  strongest  terms  and  most  af- 
fectionate assurances,  declare  to  you  that  the  violation  of  a 
tittle  or  jot  of  God's  word  is  held  by  them  to  be  a  sin  before 
God.  Hence  the  presentation  of  their  ideas  demands  more 
than  ordinary  care.     It  will  be  less  easy  to  reach  any  conclu- 


434  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

sions  from  the  declaration  of  their  self-consciousness,  which 
renders  the  test  of  their  declaration  concerning  the  parts  of 
Scripture  in  particular  the  more  necessary.  What  they  un- 
justly demand  concerning  the  Scripture,  viz,  that  we  should 
not  commit  ourselves  to  what  the  Scripture  says  of  itself,  but 
to  what  we  observe  in  it  as  a  whole,  will  be  the  only  safe  guide 
to  help  us  make  our  way  through  the  labyrinth  of  their 
studies.  I  call  it  a  labyrinth;  for,  in  sooth,  with  however 
much  indulgence  and  brotherly  kindness  we  may  judge  their 
labors,  the  complaint  cannot  be  repressed,  that  by  the  in- 
definiteness  which  characterizes  the  definitions  of  their  con- 
ceptions, the  writers  of  this  tendency  both  mutually  and  from 
themselves,  even  at  times  in  their  self-same  books,  so  differ 
from  each  other,  and  so  confuse  the  representation,  that  to  be 
ethical  of  tendency  and  clear  seem  never  capable  of  going 
hand  in  hand. 

To  hold  myself  strenuously  to  the  point  in  question,  I  pass 
the  consideration  by,  whether,  in  their  general  starting-point, 
the  ethicals  still  stand  upon  the  basis  of  the  faith,  and  confine 
myself  exclusively  to  the  assertion,  that,  so  far  as  it  concerns 
the  particular  point  of  the  Scripture-inspiration,  they  alto- 
gether walk  the  line  of  the  moderns.  For  though,  in  the  mat- 
ter of  revelation,  the  ethicals  still  acknowledge  much  of  what 
the  moderns  deny,  and  even  radically  depart  from  the  moderns 
who  deny  every  intervention  of  the  living  God  in  that  which 
has  once  entered  upon  being ;  and  while,  for  the  most  part,  the 
ethicals  accept  such  a  personal  role  on  the  part  of  God  in  his- 
tory by  manifestation  and  revelation,  by  regeneration  and  il- 
lumination, still  all  this  does  not  touch  the  Scripture  inspira- 
tion. Whether,  for  instance,  in  his  prophecies  which  he  pro- 
claimed on  the  squares  of  Jerusalem,  Isaiah  was  operated  by 
the  Holy  Spirit  does  not  affect  the  Scripture-question  in  the 


1904,]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  435 

least.  With  the  Scripture  the  only  question  concerned  is,  wheth- 
er the  person  who  wrote  the  book  that  is  named  Isaiah,  was  so 
inspired  in  the  writing  of  it  by  the  Holy  Spirit  that  he  pro- 
duced a  sure  and  infallible  product.  For  these  are  two  entire- 
ly different  question,  whether  in  their  official  activity  Moses 
and  the  prophets,  or  the  evangelists  and  apostles,  were  led  by 
the  Spirit  and  quickened  as  organs  of  revelation,  or  whether 
the  persons  who  wrote  our  Bible-books  were  in  the  writing  it- 
self inspired  in  the  absolute  sense.  The  first  may  be  granted 
and  at  the  same  time  the  second  pertinently  denied; — and  this 
is  what  the  ethicals  have  actually  done.  They  still  believe  with 
us  in  a  revelation  wrought  by  God  through  immediate  inter- 
vention. Among  the  elements  of  that  revelation  they  too  ac- 
cept a  certain  working  of  God  upon  the  spirit  of  prophets 
and  apostles,  and  are  willing  to  confess  with  us  that 
in  all  their  official  work  an  Isaiah  or  a  John  were  men  "  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,"  in  their  whole  personality.  But  when 
from  this  sphere  of  revelation  I  pass  on  to  the  question  of  the 
completion  of  the  Scripture  as  Scripture,  and  of  the  putting- 
together  in  a  book  not  only  of  what  Paul  and  John  them- 
selves wrote,  but  of  all  the  books,  including  the  historic  books, 
which  lie  before  us,  and  then  ask,  whether  a  specifically  peculiar 
and  an  absolutely  sure  inspiration  governs  this  act  of  writing, 
they  definitely  deny  it,  and  so  deny  the  real  inspiration  of  the 
Scripture  entirely. 

Do  we  hereby  lay  anything  unlawfully  at  their  charge?  Let 
this  be  decided  by  Rothe,  who  is  the  brightest,  relatively  clear- 
est, and  most  celebrated  among  the  soberer  writers  of  this  ten- 
dency, and  to  whose  processes  of  thought  no  single  new  ele- 
ment has  been  added  by  the  later  dogmatists  of  their  class, — 
a  man  to  whom  I  appeal  miOre  gladly  because  he  himself  de- 
clares :    "  The  opinion  which  I  here  write  down  is  none  other 


436  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

than  what  openly  or  tacitly  is  thought  and  confessed  among 
all  believing  theologians  " ;  because  he  valiantly  opposes  the 
eiffort  of  the  ethicals  longer  to  hide  their  real  meaning  from  the 
people,  and  no  less  because  Rothe  has  likewise  dominated  and 
quickened  the  ideas  of  the  Scriptures  current  especially  among 
the  younger  ethicals  in  the  Netherlands. 

And  Rothe  candidly  declares,  that  there  is  no  objection  to 
call  our  newer  representation  of  the  matter  "  the  inspiration  of 
the  Holy  Scripture,  v;hich  is  the  same  name  given  it  by  the  an- 
cient church,  and  it  is  deemed  lawful  to  launch  it  out  as  such 
upon  the  world.  This,  however,  is  not  well  done,  and  must  lead 
to  a  confusion  of  ideas.  In  truth,  our  aspect  of  the  matter 
is  of  a  totally  dififeirent  sort  from  the  church's  doctrine  of 
Inspiration."  Thus  you  hear  it  from  his  own  lips  that  it  is 
"something  of  an  entirely  different  sort,"  and  at  the  end  he 
does  not  hesitate  to  reach  this  serious  conclusion :  that  the 
Bible  which  presents  its  image  to  the  exegete  for  exegesis  is 
readily  different  from  that  which  the  orthodox  theologian 
and  the  ordinary  believing  Christian  takes  it  to  be  when  rev- 
erently he  takes  the  Holy  Book  in  hand. 

And  what  is  that  better  and  ethical  representation  accord- 
ing to  Rothe  ?  It  originates  from  Schleiermacher,  the 
scholarly  philosopher  and  more  than  theologian  who,  half 
a  century  ago,  at  an  unhappy  hour,  posited  the  fatal  principle 
against  whose  pricks  the  whole  arniy  of  the  meditating  theo- 
logians have  kicked  their  heels,  and  by  which  throughout  its 
fatal  process  of  development  the  ethical  tendelncy  was  and  is 
governed ;  from  Schleiermacher,  according  to  whom  we  are 
to  understand  by  inspiration  nothing  other  than  "  the  activity 
of  the;  universal  mind  in  the  will  of  the  individual  for  the 
sake  of  producing  a  definite  special  work."  "  So  that  act 
of  composing  one  of  the  holy  books  and  the  preceding  and 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  437 

fundamental  creation  of  thought  in  the  soul  of  the  Scripture- 
writer  cannot  be  looked  upon  as  an  act  of  divine  revelation." 
Corresponding  to  this,  Rothe's  representation  is  that  there  is 
a  church  of  Christ.  From  this  church  a  higher  life  operates 
outward.  She  owes  this  higher  life  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  who 
pitched  his  tent  in  the  midst  of  her,  and  elevates  the  sinful 
life  up  to  a  "  divine-human  "  life.  This  church  exists  organic- 
ally. Hence  her  nobler  organs,  the  apostles,  possessed  this 
Geineingcist  in  a  special  measure,  and  under  this  constella- 
tion their  enlightenment  became  higher  graded  than  that  of 
the  ordinary  laity.  And  that  which  in  the  most  pregnant  sense 
caused  this  illumination  to  become  inspiration,  was  the  fact 
that  for  a  single  time  God  lifted  up  the  life  in  their  soul 
by  a  new  touch,  which  made  their  consciousness  of  God  more 
clear,  and  from  this  brightened  consciousness  of  God  they 
were  able  to  produce  rich  and  new  thoughts.  As  a  result 
of  this,  Rothe  held  that  there  can  be  no  mention  of  an  infal- 
libility of  Scripture ;  that  most  of  the  writers,  but  never  the 
Scripture  itself,  can  be  called  inspired ;  that  inspiration 
differs  greatly  in  degree  among  the  writers  severally; 
and  that  therefore  the  explanation  given  by  the  apostles  of 
the  Scripture  of  the  Old  Covenant  often  seems  to  him  incor- 
rect ;  that  their  representation  of  Christian  truth  cannot  be 
taken  to  be  normative  for  us  per  sc;  and  that,  which  is  es- 
pecially noteworthy,  even  the  image,  the  picture,  given  us 
of  the  Christ  is  not  of  itself  possessed  of  a  guarantee  of  being 
a  faithful  reproduction.  Rothe  therefore  abandons  altogether 
the  narratives  of  creation  and  the  fall ;  views  the  historical 
books  as  collections  of  records  and  documents  which  teem 
with  mistakes ;  and  when  the  sum-total  is  reached,  there  is 
little  more  left  of  his  Bible  than  what,  if  it  be  in  an  imperfect 
way,  has  come  to  us  as  the  result  of  preceding  spiritual  reve- 


438  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

lation  in  those  books,  and  what  we  can  obtain  from  it  by  the 
criticism  of  faith.  Hence,  according  to  the  ethicals,  for  the 
church  of  our  day  there  is  alongside  of  and  above  the  written 
Word,  the  living  divine  revelation,  which  continues  to  operate 
just  as  it  did  in  earlier  days. 

Concerning  this  ethical  representation  allow  me  to  present 
three  observations :  The  radical  mistake  in  this  representation 
is,  in  my  opinion,  the  assertion  that  "  the  truth  ever  bears  an 
ethical  character."  This  certainly  applies  to  its  central  origin 
in  God,  and  equally  to  its  effect  upon  persons ;  but  can  by  no 
means  hold  true  of  its  historical  process  of  manifestation  nor 
of  its  organs.  He  who  first  takes  away  from  the  truth  every- 
thing that  is  not  ethical ;  makes  "  truth  "  to  mean  a  "seeing  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,"  and  then  quotes  the  text  "  Whosoever  is 
not  born  again  cannot  see  the  Kingdom  of  God," — such  an  one 
can  very  easily  maintain  so  incorrect  a  representation.  But 
.since  the  sensorium  of  "  truth  "  is  not  the  Will,  but  the  con- 
sciousness, we  object  most  strenuously  to  this  maiming  of  the 
truth,  and  this  obliteration  of  the  boundary-lines  between  con- 
ceptions which  are  so  specifically  different.  The  ihelamatic  and 
the  noetic  life  form  indeed  two  separate  spheres,  whose  ming- 
ling together  beclouds  our  whole  representation,  and  confuses 
all  our  thoughts. 

The  representation  derived  from  the  foregoing,  that  "  in- 
spiration "  is  bound  to  "  regeneration,"  is  equally  faulty. 
This  also  is  an  effort  to  render  an  altogether  different  con- 
ception ethical,  by  which  that  which  is  beautiful,  ordered,  and 
distinguished  is  melted  down  chaotically.  That  which  follows 
from  and  after  regeneration  is  illumination,  the  enlighten- 
ment, which  falls  to  the  portion  of  every  child  of  God,  but 
v.'hich,  as  the  case  of  Balaam  clearly  shows,  differs  specifically 
from  inspiration. 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  439 

No  less  faulty  is  their  representation  that  the  new  elements 
of  revelation  which  the  Scriptures  of  the  prophets  and  apos- 
tles offer  us  had  risen  from  the  depths  of  their  inner  lives, 
whose  ethical  character  has  been  eminently  elevated  by  the 
divine  touch.  Even  though  it  were  possible  to  imagine 
that  they  were  free  from  sin,  even  then  life  would  be 
quickened  by  the  Word ;  since,  indeed,  Jesus  does  not  say : 
"  This  is  to  know  thee,  that  they  have  eternal  life  " ;  but,  on 
the  contrary,  "  This  is  life  eternal,  that  they  know  thee  " ; — by 
the  Word  is  the  creation,  by  the  seed  of  the  Word  the  recrea- 
tion of  our  soul.  But  since,  moreover,  sin  continued  to  break 
the  harmony  in  them,  the  distinction  must  be  the  stronger 
maintained  between  the  ethical  and  the  non-ethical  in  the 
revelation-organs.  Or  is  it  not  so?  Souls  that  are  greatly 
endued  with  grace  are  frequently  greatly  deficient  in  under- 
standing ;  while  in  others  who  are  of  large  understanding 
the  measure  of  grace  is  sometimes  almost  shamefully  unno- 
ticeable.  What  overtook  Rome  when,  for  the  sake  of  having 
an  infallible  Christ,  they  demanded  a  Mary  of  an  immaculate 
conception,  is  the  same  that  has  overtaken  the  ethicals ;  for, 
in  a  similar  way,  they  deny  the  infallible  thought  of  the  Scrip- 
ture, because  ethically  the  sinless  mother  of  such  infallible 
thought  remained  wanting  in  the  soul  of  its  writers.  In  fact, 
therefore,  their  "  theanthropic,"  i.  e.  divine-human  life,  is  noth- 
ing but  a  confusion  of  conceptions  sprung  from  the  same  fun- 
damental error.  For  a  "  divine-human  "  life,  which  commimi- 
cates  itself  to  the  redeemed  by  tincture,  as  the  theosophists 
dream,  or,  if  you  like,  by  way  of  atoms,  is  a  teaching  which 
is  altogether  unreformed,  even  rather  than,  for  the  sake  of  the 
communicatio  idioviatmn,  pseudo-Lutheran,  founded  upon 
nothing  less  than  a  confiisio  nafiirarum,  i.  e.,  a  pantheistic 
mJnglinsr  of  the  divine  and  the  human. 


440  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

And  finally  an  equally  great  fault  is  the  falsification  which 
is  thus  introduced  into  the  confession  of  the  Holy  Spirit : 
partly  because  they  continually  take  the  personal  Holy  Spirit 
as  identical  with  his  quickening  reflex  in  the  church,  naming 
him  her  family-spirit;  and  partly  because,  thus  limiting  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  thei  ethical  domain  (the  domain  of  law  and 
norm,  will  and  judgment),  they  dispute  his  right  to  the  hon- 
orable title  of  being  the  Herald  of  the  deep  things  of  Grod, 
i.  e.  the  Communicator  and  the  Inspirer  of  conscious  thoughts. 

My  second  observation  concerns  equally  a  confusion,  not 
this  time  in  two  different  spheres,  but  in  distinguishable  peri- 
ods of  development  in  the  same  sphere. 

The  first  church,  it  is  said,  received  the,  life  without  the 
written  word,  atqui  ergo  it  also  exists  for  us  indeipendently 
of  the  Scripture.  This  is  a  conclusion  which  should  be  re- 
jected, because  the  embryonic  state  differs  from  the  exuteri- 
nal  specifically  in  this,  that  the  embryo  absorbs  within  itself 
the  mother-blood  immediately,  while  the  adult  must  prepare 
the  food  himself: — a  specific  difference  which  can  be  formu- 
lated as  follows :  that  inspiration  produced  something  while 
illumination  can  only  reproduce, — the  reason  why  the  church 
cannot  get  on  without  a  Scripture  in  which  it  finds  the  image 
to  be  reproduced  delineated  in  pure  outlines.  Though  we  do 
not  deny  that  with  an  adult  person  the  ozone  from  the  atmos- 
phere may  enter  into  him  through  the  mouth,  nostrils,  and 
ear,  and  through  the  pores  of  the  skin,  and  that  in  like  man- 
ner the  church  of  the  Lord  may  drink  from  the  spiritual  at- 
mosphere through  her  spiritual  pores,  we  refuse  to  stamp  this 
spiritual  ozone  with  the  name  of  the  Word  of  God,  just  as 
surely  as  the  famishing  man  would  scorn  you  when,  as  he 
called  after  you  for  bread,  you  would  undertake  to  satisfy  his 
hunger  with  atmospheric  ozone. 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  441 

My  third  observation  is,  that  in  this  way  the  ethical  ten- 
dency exhibits  a  theory  which  gUtters  indeed  very  tempting- 
ly, but  fails  of  the  explanation  which  it  is  bound  to  give. 

Rothe  himself  acknowledges  that  the  apostles  of  the  Lord, 
and  we  add  the  Lord  himself,  have  subscribed,  not  to  the  inspi- 
ration of  the  ethicals,  but  to  that  one  which  we  defend.  He 
acknowledges  that  the  church  of  all  ages,  under  the  Old  and 
New  Covenant,  have  taught  not  a  looming  up  of  the  truth 
from  out  the  unconscious  ethical  life,  but  very  truly  a  com- 
munication of  conscious  truth;  also,  that  what  the'  believing 
Christian  feels  in  this  pious  reading  of  the  Scripture,  is  not 
covered  by  his,  but  only  by  the  orthodox  theory.  He  grants, 
indeed,  that  the  Scripture  does  not  come  with  this  theory  to 
the  ethicals,  but  that  the  ethicals  introduce  this  theory  into 
the  vestibules  of  the  Scripture.  And  every  one  perceives 
that  this  explains  nothing,  and  simply  posits  a  new  imaginary 
something  by  the  side  of  the  object  to  be  explained.  When,  for 
instance,  and  this  is  one  out  of  a  hundred,  Isaiah  foretells  that 
Hezfikiah  is  to  have  another  fifteen  years  added  to  his  life,  it 
is  plain  that  this  number  fifteen  could  not  have  loomed  up  from 
the  depths  of  ethical  life ;  so  that  already,  by  this  single  fact, 
the  ethicals  are  brought  to  face  the  painful  choice,  either  to 
declare  that  their  theory  is  insufficient,  or,  worse  yet,  to  min- 
imize Israel,  one  of  the  noblest  organs  of  revelation,  to  a  very 
unethical  fortune-teller  or  an  imposter  of  a  low  spiritual  level. 

My  last  observation  is,  that  to  draw  a  usable  conclusion 
from  such  imperfect  premises,  the  ethicals  themselves  appear 
at  length  as  the  judges  of  their  own  theory. 

What  does  Rothe  assert?  This,  that  the  prophets  and  apos- 
tles could  not  have  possessed  an  "  errorless  "  knowledge  of 
the  truth,  since  they  were  ethically  imperfect ;  nevertheless, 
h€  himself  dares  to  maintain  that  (risum  teneatis  amici)  he. 


442  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [July, 

Rothe,  and  his  ethical  friends  (who  ethically  may  stand  be- 
neath the  apostles),  are  perfectly  well  capable,  with  these  im- 
perfect pieces  in  hand,  to  attain  unto  "  an  errorless  knowledge 
of  the  truth."  Thus  Rothe  readily  turns  his  back  upon  the 
theory  which  rendered  it  necessary  to  abandon  the  infallibility 
of  the  apostles,  as  soon  as  it  touched  himself  and  his  con- 
genial allies.  In  this  way  thelematic  imperfection  and  noetic 
accuracy  are  taken  to  be  compatible  with  each  other,  and  the 
common  methods  of  speech  of  the  less  "  unconscious  "  people 
resumes  with  the  ethical  scholars  again  its  original  right. 

Hence,  however  much  we  appreciate  in  the  ethical  theo- 
logians that  struggling  with  both  hands  to  oppose  the  irresist- 
ible impulsive  force  of  the  principle,  which,  as  a  serpent  fos- 
tered in  their  bosom,  attacks  their  faith  at  the  very  heart;  yet 
with  reference  to  this  question  of  the  theopneusty,  their  sys- 
tem may  not  be  characterized  less  harshly  than  as  a  cloudy 
mingling  of  philosophical  theories  with  gnostic  aspirations, 
covered  by  the  content  of  a  faith-consciousness  which  belongs 
to  Rome,  and  not  to  us ;  and  that  complaint  must  be  entered 
against  it,  that  by  this  thretefold  motive  it  leads  to  the  absolute 
destruction  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scripture.  Of  the 
Scripture-inspiration,  Rothe  himself  has  said :  "  Sit  ut  sit  aut 
non  sit,"  and  the  modern  Lipsius  expressed  it  still  more  clearly, 
that  all  effort  to  save  inspiration  by  the  abandonment  of  the 
old  dogma  could  result  in  nothing  but  self-deception  and  mis- 
guidance of  others.  And  therefore,  however  much  they  may 
classify  us  in  the  corpus  znrorum  ohsciirornm,  and  try  to  make 
the  church  dogma  ridiculous  by  the  "  automaten-parodie," 
we  hold  fast  inexorably  to  the  ancient  and  unweakened  theop- 
neusty ;  in  our  historical  simplicity,  or,  if  you  will,  in  our  edu- 
cational backwardness,  still  believing  that,  even  though  he  re- 
main ethically  imperfect,  an  embassador  is  capable  of  transmit- 
ting without  error  what  his  sovereign  inspires  him  with. 


666  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 


ARTICLE   IV. 

THE  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM  OF  THE  PRESENT  DAY.^ 

BY   THE   REVEREND   ABRAHAM    KUYPER,   D.D.,    LL.D. — TRANS- 
LATED BY  THE  REVEREND  J.   HENDRIK  DE  VRIES,  D.D. 

But  some  of  you  may  say,  Is  there  no  good  whatever  in  the 
biblical  criticism  of  the  present  day  ?  Is  it  merely  a  stumbling 
over  straws  and  a  game  of  critical  splitting  of  hairs  ?  Or  have 
you  not  heard  of  the  very  serious  charges  which  are  laid  against 
the  views  of  the  ancient  church?  Did  not  these  grave  asser- 
tions, which,  in  spite  of  ourselves,  compelled  our  scientific 
mind  to  agree  with  them,  ever  disturb  your  scientific  con- 
science? And,  if  so,  how  can  you  harmonize  your  beautiful 
confession  with  them? 

In  response  to  which  inquiries,  allow  me  a  single  word, 
which,  if  it  does  not  engage  itself  with  particulars,  holds  itself 
true  to  principle  and  motive. 

First,  as  it  appears  to  me,  the  gigantic  labor  which  our  crit- 
ics have  devoted  to  the  Scripture,  is  by  no  means  lost.  On  the 
contrary,  I  have  the  firm  conviction  that  in  the  end,  and  under 
God's  gracious  disposal,  even  the  excesses  of  the  most  rad- 
ical Scripture-anatomists  will  be  productive  of  good.  How 
could  it  ever  be  unimportant  and  to  no  purpose,  as  far  as  prin- 
ciple and  reverence  allow  it,  to  study  the  origin  of  the  Holy 
Scripture  in  the  processes  of  its  entering  upon  existence ;  to 
point  out  the  seams  where  the  pieces  of  the  shining  robe  have 
been  so  beautifully  woven  together ;  and  in  a  better  way  than 
was  ever  done  before  to  frame,  if  not  with  mathematical  cer- 
^  Concluded  from  page  442. 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  667 

tainty  at  least  with  conjecture,  the  circle  in  whose  midst,  the 
author  by  whom,  and  the  time  in  which,  a  book  of  Scripture 
originated?  So  little  do  I  aim  at  the  abandonment  of  these 
studies,  that  I  would  no  sooner  sanction  an  official  ban  upon 
these  vivisectorial  excesses  and  physiological  indelicacies  with 
the  Corpus  Scriptures  than  with  the  corpus  hnmanum.  But 
if,  in  the  circle  of  the  medical  sciences,  these  vivisectorial  ex- 
cesses and  physiological  violations  of  common  chastity  are  not 
prohibited  by  law,  has  not  the  nobler-mnded  medicus  the 
right,  in  virtue  of  the  principle  itself  of  his  science, — i.  e.  in 
the  name  of  the  human  character  that  belongs  to  it,  because  it 
has  the  home  for  its  object, — to  protest  against  these  shame- 
ful cruelties,  and  the  no  less  shameful  indelicacies,  as  inde- 
cent and  unlawful?  Or,  is  it  not  true  that  in  his  bodily  ap- 
pearing man  ceases  to  be  worthy  of  the  honor  of  furnishing 
an  object  for  a  separate  science,  when,  treating  the  animal  cru- 
elly and  himself  having  become  bestial,  he  degrades  himself 
to  being  little  better  than  a  corpus  vile?  And  have  we  no 
equal  rights,  when  it  concerns  the  Corpus  Scriptures,  to  enter 
our  complaints  on  the  ground  of  the  absence  of  feeling  in  the 
vivisectors  and  the  offensive  profanities  of  the  Scripture- 
physiologists  ;  not  in  spite,  but  in  the  name,  of  our  science ; 
both  because,  by  their  actions,  the  principle  itself  of  theology 
is  violated,  and  because  a  patchwork  quilt  such  as  they  make 
the  Scripture  to  be  does  no  longer  reward  the  trouble  of  sci- 
entific investigation. 

I  welcome  the  finest  perception  by  the  senses  [aXaOiqcns:), 
also,  in  the  domain  of  criticism.  But  even  as  our  nerves  and 
brains,  the  critical  organ  also  can  suffer  from  hypersesthesis, 
so  that  it  cannot  do  other  than  observe  incorrectly ;  thus  reach- 
ing that  inharmonious  condition  which  makes  every  noise 
seem  louder,  every  touch  more  startling,  and  every  uneven- 


6®8  Bihlicd  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct, 

ness  the  rougher  to  its  sense.  Such  a  hyperassthesis  becomes 
a  power  that  g-overns  the  patient,  the  irresistible  impulse  of 
which  is  heightened  by  one's  very  efforts  to  resist.  Where- 
fore not  every  one  who  announces  himself  needs  to  be  heard, 
nor  is  all  criticism  indiscriminately  to  be  taken  into  account, 
but  it  must  first  be  determined,  by  the  principle  of  theology 
itself,  whether  we  deal  with  a  normal  observer,  or  with  one 
who,  abnormally  excited,  is  not  able  to  criticise  correctly. 

Finally,  the  Holy  Scripture  condemns  the  world  and  the  spir- 
it that  governs  it.  Hence  nothing  can  be  more  natural  than 
[that  this  spirit  of  the  world,  which  has  made  itself  so  strongly 
I  felt  in  this  age,  should  bend  its  energies  toward  the  breaking- 
down  of  the  authority  of  the  Scripture.  Either  it  must  bend 
before  the  Scripture  or  the  Scripture  must  bend  to  it,  and  it 
cannot  be  otherwise  than  that  the  spirit  which  inspires  the 
j  world,  must  wage  inexorable  war  against  the  spirit  that  in- 
spired  the  Scripture.  The  antithesis  formed  by  the  two  is 
diametrical.  And  since  we  also,  who  are  investigators  of  the 
Scripture,  have  drunk  of  the  spirit  of  the  world,  the  danger 
is  possible  that  our  biblical  criticism  may  adopt  a  tentative 
character,  whereby,  under  the  mask  of  honoring  it,  our  study 
of  the  Scripture  may  tend  to  undermine  its  authority.  This 
presumption  has  indeed  become  a  probability  by  this  single 
fact,  that  many  men  who  attach  no  significance  whatever  to 
the  Scripture,  and  scarcely  believe  in  it  at  all,  devote  to  it  the 
best  parts  of  their  life  and  the  choicest  of  their  powers. 

The  principle  of  theology  itself,  therefore,  must  needs  watch 
against  the  degeneration  of  her  scientific  and  sacred  charac- 
ter, both  as  regards  the  extent  of  the  principle,  the  assthesis 
of  the  investigator,  and  that  which  determines  the  tendency 
of  the  investigation.  Hence  I  do  not  plead  for  conservatism. 
If  that  were  my  aim,  I  could  readily  make  my  task  much 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  669 

lighter  by  setting  up  Reuss  against  Kiienen,  Schultz  against 
Reuss,  and  the  collaborators  of  Langc's  Commentaries  against 
Schultz,  in  order  finally  to  assume  for  my  own  responsibility 
only  so  much  as  the  most  conservative  have  yielded  to  the 
claim  of  criticism.  But  what  would  this  avail?  For  the  sake 
of  secondary  considerations,  conservatism  merely  disparages 
theories  whose  validity  one  is  bound  to  honor,  and  principles 
to  whose  spread  one  is  prepared  to  devote  his  energies.  There 
is  no  strength  in  this.  And  therefore  I  make  no  appeal  at  the 
bar  of  conservatism,  but  ask  the  encyclopedia  of  our  science, 
what  the  proper  principle  of  theology  here  both  allows  and 
disallows.  And  when,  with  respect  to  this  radical  question,  w€ 
grant  that  theology,  as  was  shown  in  the  beginning  of  this 
article,  having  not  the  creaturely  but  the  Creator  as  object, 
takes  no  observations,  but,  in  direct  distinction  from  all  other 
sciences,  becomes  sensible  of  facts,  so  that  in  the  science  of 
theology  it  is  not  the  spirit  of  the  subject  but  the  spirit  of  the 
object  which  is  the  active  investigator,  it  follows  immediately 
that  all  study,  which,  as  shown  by  its  results,  has  ceased  to  be 
the  instrument  in  the  employ  of  God  the  Holy  Spirit,  falls. 
eo  ipso,  outside  the  boundaries  of  the  theological  domain. 
This  is  a  position  which,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  is  abso- 
lutely devoid  of  strength  to  our  opponents,  and  therefore  is 
not  intended  for  those,  who,  after  having  embalmed  theology, 
i.  e.  "  the  science  of  God,"  have  proclaimed  that  the  science 
of  "  Religion  "  is  queen ;  but  which  I  maintain  in  its  entirety 
in  the  face  of  every  one  who  still  professes  with  us  to  be 
priests  in  the  temple  of  theology. 

As  long  as  we  desire  to  be  theologians,  we  may  never  raise  the 
building  of  our  science,  save  under  and  in  the  service  of  God 
the  Holy  Spirit,  since  he  is  our  only  Architect  and  Master- 


670  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

builder.  Thus  if,  as  a  measure  of  safety,  we  apply  this  princi- 
ple first  to  another  part  of  this  science,  we,  as  theologians,  are 
in  duty  bound  to  dismiss  the  free-will  services  in  the  domain 
of  ethics  of  both  Martensen,  the  mediating  theologian,  and  Van 
der  Goltz,  the  full-blooded  ethical,  since  the  one  condoned  and 
called  good  the  violation  of  an  oath,  and  the  other  the  violation 
of  the  commandment  of  honesty  in  persons  of  high  station 
[Von  Bismarck  was  here  referred  to].  The  works  of  both 
these  masters  fall  short  of  the  seal  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  are 
as  such,  eo  ipso,  refused  admittance,  as  contraband,  at  the  the- 
ological frontier,  where  the  blade  of  the  cherub  glitters,  and 
the  Spiritus  Creator  is  worshiped  as  Omnium  Solus  Doctor. 
If  now  we  apply  this  same  standard  to  the  study  of  the 
Holy  Scripture,  the  leading  thought  which  we  reach  will  be 
as  follows : — 

1.  That  every  view,  according  to  which  what  is  holy  can 
appear  in  the  form  of  a  lie,  and  by  which,  under  the  use  of  the 
shameful  invention  of  the  so-called  "  pious  fraud,"  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  made  to  counteract  his  own  deepest  character,  must 
be  rejected,  as  being  based  upon  an  erroneous  investigation. 
To  pretend,  for  instance,  that  in  books  which  one  accepts  as 
canonical  the  Holy  Spirit  represents  myths  as  history,  and 
places  before  us  a  vaticinium  ex  eventu  in  a  false  form  as 
prophecy,  is  to  attribute  absurdities  to  that  Spirit  which  are 
inconsistent  with  his  integrity. 

2.  Each  theory — and  this  will  be  considered  a  little  more 
at  length — must  equally  be  dismissed,  whose  result  antago- 
nizes what  the  Holy  Spirit  asserts  in  the  Scripture  concern- 
ing the  Scripture. 

No  one  denies  that  the  Holy  Scripture  comes  to  us  with 
an  absolute  principle.  It  asserts,  indeed,  that,  all  "  wisdom  " 
of   the   world   is    "  foolishness  " ;   that   only   the    Spirit,    who 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  671 

speaks  of  himself  as  the  searcher  of  all  things,  can  teach  us 
wisdom ;  and  that,  for  this  reason,  every  creaturely  spirit  must 
subject  itself  in  its  thinking,  speaking,  and  acting,  now  and 
eternally,  to  that  Spirit.  This  places  us  before  an  absolute 
dilemma ;  a  choice  with  no  way  of  escape.  For  this  principle 
must  either  be  contested,  by  doing  which  return  is  made  to 
the  wisdom  of  the  world ;  or  this  principle  must  be  accepted, 
and  this  gives  it  the  right  of  way  across  the  entire  domain 
of  our  studies.  With  those  who  chose  the  first  member  of  this 
dilemma,  we  can  have  no  further  dealings  here :  for  them  there 
exists  no  longer  any  Scripture.  But  of  those  who  made  the 
better  choice,  and  who  with  joy  and  with  an  undivided  heart 
have  said  "  Amen "  to  this  absolute  Scripture-principle,  we 
ask  in  all  seriousness,  "  What  claim  is  made  in  the  Holy 
Scripture  which  it  announces  concerning  itself  as  Scripture?" 
And  here  our  way  separates  itself  irrevocably  from  that  of 
the  ethicals.  For  when  we  reach  this  point,  the  ethicals  say: 
"  This  you  must  determine  from  the  facts  as  they  present  them- 
selves to  you  in  that  Scripture ;  and  if  you  find  errors  there, 
it  but  shows,  eo  ipso,  that  the  Scripture  does  not  pretend  to 
be  infallible."  This,  however,  is  no  correct  process  of  reason- 
ing, and  I  reject  it  on  these  two  decisive  grounds:  (1)  be- 
cause, sanction  to  pass  such  a  judgment  is  only  conceivable 
when  one  is  in  possession  of  the  autographs  themselves, — for, 
as  the  case  now  stands,  it  is  possible  that  errors  have  crept  in 
later  on  in  what  was  written  without  error;  and  (3)  because 
the  self-witness  of  the  Holy  Spirit  concerning  his  own  work 
is  far  more  authoritative  than  the  judgment  which  you,  O  fal- 
lible man,  form  on  the  ground  of  this  work  of  the  Spirit.  In 
a  child,  indeed,  it  would  be  presumptuous  and  disrespectful 
if  he  formed  conclusions  from  his  father's  doings  that  are 
contradictory  to  the  conscious  self-witness  of  the  father;  and 


672  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

how  can  you  dare  to  pass  criticism  upon  the  self-consciousness 
of  the  Scripture  when  you  have  no  other  standard  in  hand 
than  that  which  you  assume  to  find  in  the  Scripture? 

And,  therefore,  I  neither  ask  Rothe  nor  Rabiger  what  the 
Scripture  claims  to  be,  but  the  highest  interpreter  of  the 
Scripture-organism  itself;  to-wit,  the  Christ  and  his  anointed 
apostolate.  If,  then,  Christ  and  his  apostles  declare  that  the 
Scripture  of  the  Old  Covenant  is  very  really  inspired,  and  that 
by  this  inspiration  it  is  of  binding  authority  even  to  the  ex- 
tent of  the  individual  word;  or,  to  cite  a  single  point  in  detail, 
if,  with  a  lifted  finger,  the  Son  of  God  says  to  me,  "  Thus  and 
so  has  Daniel  the  prophet  spoken;  my  disciples,  consider  it!" 
and  I,  like  the  ethicals,  should  form  a  contrary  conclusion 
notwithstanding,  then  I  would  deem  that  I  had  forfeited  the 
claim  to  the  name  of  theologian,  and  I  would  consider  myself 
to  have  entered  into  a  flagrant  contest  with  the  real  principle 
of  my  science,  since  I  contradicted  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  self- 
conscious  declaration  of  his  absolute  interpreters. 

3.  Every  critical  study  of  the  Holy  Scripture  must  be  re- 
jected as  being  foreign  to  theology,  which  is  governed  by  a 
philosophical  principle  which  evidently  reacts  against  the  prin- 
ciple of  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  this  canon  especially  interprets 
a  good  deal. 

Let  us  consider  this  in  the  following  four  points : —      • 

(1)  Indisputably  the  entire  Scripture-study,  especially  that 
of  the  Old  Testament,  is  at  this  moment  governed  by  the  ques- 
tion, whether  there  was  a  fall  from  holy  to  unholy,  or  whether 
there  was  a  gradual  ascent  from  the  lower  to  the  pure  and 
holy.  This  question  returns  in  three  stages :  First,  with  Adam ; 
then  with  Israel  in  the  wilderness ;  and,  finally,  with  the  early 
Christian  church.  And  because  this  question  is  now  answered 
in  the  negative,  the  hamartialogy  of  Genesis  iii.  must  be  the 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  673 

product  of  phantasy ;  the  nobler  parts  of  the  thorah  must  not 
be  attributed  to  Moses,  but  lie  at  the  end  of  the  Israelitish  de- 
velopment; and  the  consciousness  of  the  Christian  church 
must  only  ripen  gradually.  And  now  I  ask,  "  Is  there  a  ten- ' 
dency  to  be  noted  here,  or  not?"  And  when  I  know,  that  the 
elimination  of  the  fall  is  at  present  the  principle  of  all  philos- 
ophy; that  the  idea  of  such  a  fall  is  most  deeply  insulting  to 
the  pride  of  the  human  spirit;  and  that  the  Holy  Spirit  con- 
demns the  wisdom  of  the  world  in  this  very  point;  that,  in 
giving  holy  gifts  to  Adam  and  to  Moses,  and  graces  and  pow- 
ers on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  the  Holy  Spirit  exhibits  the  di- 
vine majesty,  and  in  each  subsequent  falling  away  our  deep 
corruption,  is  it  not  folly  itself  for  us  theologians  to  be  train- 
bearers  of  a  Scripture-study  which  at  each  of  these  three 
points  secularizes  the  Scripture? 

(2)  Seeking  an  accord  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  spirit  of 
the  world  runs  again  and  again  after  Synergism,  in  order,  by 
accentuating  human  activity,  God's  inworking  may  not  merely 
be  limited,  but  destroyed,  particularly  in  its  absoluteness. 
Likewise  there  is  a  tendency  at  work  in  the  biblical  criticism 
of  the  present  day  to  undertake  the  same  contest  against  the 
sovereignty  of  inspiration  which  Arminius  waged  against  the 
sovereignty  of  grace.  For  whereupon  does  the  denial  of 
prophecy  rest  other  than  upon  the  denial  of  God's  immovable 
decree?  What  is  the  humanizing  of  inspiration  other  than  a 
repeated  protest  against  a  grace,  which,  being  irresistible, 
never  fails  of  its  purpose? 

(3)  The  "  wisdom  of  the  world  "  constantly  seeks  to  reduce 
the  immediate  work  of  God  in  history  to  ever  smaller  dimen- 
sions, and  cannot  rest  until  the  factor  "  God  "  has  entirely  dis- 
appeared from  the  same.  In  like  manner,  the  Scripture  also, 
which  lays  its  witness  in  the  scale  against  this  very  process  of 


674  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

the  wiping  out  of  God's  name,  had  to  be  distilled  until  creation 
passed  away  in  a  Darwinian  evolution;  the  miracle  went  hid- 
ing; inspiration  was  reduced  to  an  unobservable  touch  of  a 
soul  unconscious  of  that  fact;  and,  finally,  the  human  author 
appeared  so  one-sidedly  in  the  foreground  that  at  length  there 
remained  no  higher  honor  for  the  Divine  Author  (Auctor  pri- 
marius)  than  the  service  of  a  laudatory  editor  with  the  people 
who  still  believe. 

(4)  It  has  ever  been  a  trait  of  the  wisdom  of  the  world, 
and  it  is  this  especially  in  our  days,  to  class  the  idolatries  of  the 
nations  who  do  not  know  God,  as  very  honorable  forms  of 
religion  under  the  self-same  category  with  the  religion  of 
Jesus.  Its  philosophical  principle,  that  there  is  no  wall  of  sep- 
aration between  the  sacred  and  the  profane,  compelled  and 
still  compels  it  to  do  this.  But  this  was  bound  of  necessity 
to  overthrow  the  whole  Scripture-study,  especially  that  of  the 
Old  Testament.  The  simple  change  of  the  name  by  which 
henceforth  all  idolatry,  however  defiant  its  character  might 
be  to  the  only  true  God,  is  called  "  religion,"  is  a  criticism  on 
the  Old  Covenant  that  condemns  its  entire  world-view.  And 
so  it  came  to  pass,  that,  wholly  contradictory  to  the  teachings 
of  Scripture,  Israel's  religious  development  was  explained 
to  have  sprung  from  the  same  root  as  that  of  the  heathen,  and, 
finally,  the  nobler  idolatrous  nations  were  represented  as  co- 
operators  in  the  work  of  establishing  what  Israel,  yes  what 
Jesus,  confessed. 

Thus  we  see  that  this  irresistible  spiritual  impulse  of  the 
philosophy  of  our  age  to  transpose  in  every  way  the  "Deus- 
homo  "  into  the  "Homo-deus,"  was  bound  of  an  iron  necessity 
either  disdainfully  to  cast  off  the  whole  Scripture  or,  when 
piety  refrained  from  this,  to  take  apart  the  joining  map  of 
that   Scripture  and  put  it  differently    together    again,  till  at 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  675 

length,  in  direct  opposition  to  its  own  principle,  the  Scripture 
had  guaranteed  or  subscribed  this  false  hypothesis  of  the 
"  wisdom  of  the  world  "  with  its  seal.  This,  however,  shows 
to  us  no  less  that  that  theologian  tears  up  his  credentials,  who, 
instead  of  opposing  hand  to  hand  this  process  of  roughly  pull- 
ing out  the  leaves  of  this  most  precious  of  all  the  roses  of 
Sharon,  is  either  sufficiently  cowardly  or  thoughtless  to  allow 
himself  to  be  carried  along  by  this  current  of  the  humanizing 
of  the  Scriptures  and  to  present  it  under  pleasing  colors  to 
the  masses. 

That,  after  the  subtraction  of  all  this,  there  still  remains 
serious  objections  at  several  points  to  the  absoluteness  of  the 
inspiration  of  the  Scripture,  we  neither  deny  nor  hide,  even 
though  one  readily  sees  to  what  small  dimensions  this  moun- 
tain of  insurmountable  obstacles  has  already  fallen  away. 
This,  however,  does  not  remove  the  necessity  that,  so  far  from 
passing  lightly  by  the  still  remaining  objections,  the  scientific 
theologian  must  look  them  squarely  in  the  face,  always  bear- 
ing in  mind  this  fourfold  consideration : — 

1.  That  some  of  these  objections  flow  from  the  undeniable 
fact  that  the  perfect  autographs  do  not  lie  before  us,  but  an 
imperfect  text,  which  is  a  text  with  errors. 

2.  That  the  writing  down  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  what  was 
inspired  has  nothing  in  common  with  the  protocolization  of 
an  authentic  official  report,  but  that  the  several  events  and 
truths,  yea,  the  same  events  and  truths  in  their  many-sided 
significance,  have  been  brought  to  the  canvass  by  the  Highest 
Artist  with  a  diversion  of  color  and  many-sidedness  of  inter- 
pretation which  may  indeed  confuse  the  near-sighted  cabalist, 
but  which  by  its  delightful  harn:onies  fills  the  master-student, 
standing  at  a  distance,  with  heavenly  raptures. 

3.  It  remains  indeed  the  calling  of  apologetics  to  bring 


676  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

out  the  passages  of  Scripture  that  sound  contradictory  to 
each  other,  in  their  real,  even  though  it  be  covered,  harmony. 
Hence  the  need  of  loci  paralleli,  not  after  the  style  of  the  de- 
parted supranaturalists, — ah,  they,  indeed,  had  no  more  the- 
ology ! — no,  but  in  the  spirit  of  the  Juniuses  and  Voetiuses ; 
a  spiritual,  no  narrow-minded  Harmonistica ;  not  a  pitiful 
amateur  effort,  but  a  logical  interpretation  of  our  sense  of 
representation  by  paying  attention  to  the  TroVe;  ttw?;  vtto  tiVo9; 
and   Kara  rtV. 

4.  If,  then,  there  still  remain  seeming  inexplicables,  cruces 
interpretum,  in  the  Holy  Scripture,  before  which  not  I, — for 
that  implies  nothing, — but  all  confessing  theologians  stand, 
even  then  I  do  not  hesit,ate  a  moment  to  say  it  in  the  hearing 
of  the  whole  scientific  world,  that,  facing  the  choice  between 
leaving  this  question  unanswered,  and  with  the  simple-minded 
people  of  God  confessing  my  ignorance,  or  with  the  learned 
ethical  brethren  from  scientific  logicalness  rejecting  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Scripture,  I  firmly  choose  the  first,  and  with  my 
whole  soul  shrink  back  from  the  last. 

For,  to  say  with  Rothe  and  his  followers,  that  there  are 
myths  in  the  Scripture ;  the  creation-narrative  is  pious  phan- 
tasy ;  phantasy  likewise  the  narrative  of  the  fall ;  the  prophecies 
are  products  of  a  higher-tensioned  spiritual  life ;  the  testi- 
monies borne  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  concerning  the  Old 
Covenant  are  devoid  of  normative  power;  the  apostolic  rep- 
resentation of  the  truth  is  equally  little  normative  and  bind- 
ing ;  even  the  image  of  the  Christ  which  they  outline  and  paint 
is  not  fixedly  reliable;  and  then  solemnly  to  declare  that  the 
whole  Scripture  from  Gen.  i.  1  to  Rev.  xxii.  21  is  their  Word 
of  God,  is  more  than  I  can  do;  it  is  too  bold  for  me;  it  looks 
wonderfully  much  like  a  protcstatio  actiii  contraria,  which  I 
hear,  but  of  which  I  have  no  understanding.    And  when,  more- 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  677 

over,  I  observe  that  in  the  circles  of  these  "  faithful  "  ones 
the  modernizing  vivisectors  are  widely  known,  and  that,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  orthodox  champions  of  inspiration— r 
such  as  Gausen  not  only,  but  also  such  men  as  Hodge  and 
Philippi ;  yea,  even  Beck  and  Mehring — are  scarcely  known  at 
all,  then,  in  all  seriousness,  I  am  filled  with  apprehension  for 
the  future;  then  I  seem  to  hear  the  rushing  sound  as  of  rap- 
idly falling  waters ;  and  I  feel  the  "  zeal  of  God  "  come  over 
me  which  compels  me  to  reject  a  "  word  of  God  "  so-called 
but  which  is  fallible,  as  a  contradictio  in  terminis,  which  ex- 
changes fixedness  of  principle  for  half-measures,  and  which, 
while  ever  going  backward,  with  the  face  turned  toward 
Christ,  constantly  separates  itself  but  further  from  the 
"  Christ  according  to  the  Scriptures." 

And  should  any  one  still  answer  that,  judging  as  I  do,  I 
myself  am  not  justified,  since  I  acknowledge  errors,  if  not  in 
the  autographa,  at  least  in  the  texts  at  our  service,  then  let  me 
remove  this  latent  objection  by  this  other  question,  whether, 
if  you  held  in  your  hand  a  cup  of  pure  gold  but  whose  edge 
is  slightly  damaged,  and  I  held  in  my  hand  an  entirely  perfect 
cup  but  of  gold  which  is  not  real,  you  would  sa)^,  "  It  is  all 
the  same  to  me :  I  will  cheerfully  take  your  imitation  in  ex- 
change for  my  golden  cup  "? 

III. 

As  has  been  shown,  the  biblical  criticism  of  the  present  day 
deprives  the  church  of  her  theology,  and  robs  her  of  her  Bible. 
What  remains  to  be  demonstrated  is,  that  it  also  attacks 
the  church's  right  to  her  liberty  in  Christ,  or,  if  you  please, 
consigns  her  to  the  embraces  of  the  worst,  because  intellectual, 
kind  of  clericalism. 

A  troubled  soul,  tossed  with  tempest  and  not  comforted,  is 


678  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

filled  with  anxiety,  and  thirsts  after  certainty.  In  the  heart 
of  one  who  is  so  apprehended  of  the  Lord,  even  though  he  be 
a  plain  day-laborer,  the  sacred  things  of  the  Almighty  have 
found  a  lodging,  and  therefore  in  the  depths  of  his  soul  the 
powers  of  hell  antagonize  those  sacred  things.  Thus  a  con- 
flict is  waged  as  of  giant-forces  in  his  breast,  and  that  oppresses 
him ;  he  sees  no  way  of  escape ;  he  faints  beneath  its  tension, 
except  He  who  is  compassionate  takes  compassion  on  him, 
and  sets  him  up  upon  the  Rock  of  the  Word.  Only  when  he 
stands  on  that  Word,  does  the  oil  of  gladness  drip  in  his  soul 
instead  of  mourning,  and  the  garments  of  praise  begin  to  shine 
forth  in  place  of  the  spirit  of  heaviness,  and  the  man  breaks 
forth  in  singing  the  praises  of  Him  who  has  set  him  free  from 
bonds ;  also  from  those  oppressing  bonds  of  dependency  upon 
man,  who  at  best  is  but  a  creature  of  dust.  For  to  obtain  real 
peace,  an  unshakable  faith,  and  a  full  development  of  powers, 
our  soul  must,  in  the  depth  of  depths  and  forsaken  of  all  men, 
depend  on  God  Almighty  alone.  To  draw  one's  being  im- 
mediately from  God's  own  hand,  consciously  and  continuous- 
ly, this  renders  one  invincible,  enables  one  to  become  heroic, 
and  makes  us  surpass  ourselves.  This  was  the  secret  of  the 
power  by  which  Calvinism  once  astonished  the  world.  That 
forms  character,  steels  the  will  with  energy,  and  sets  man, 
the  citizen,  the  confessor  of  Jesus,  truly  free. 

But  how  does  the  Lord  impart  this  assurance,  with  and 
without  the  intervention  of  man,  to  the  numbers  of  his  elect, 
and  through  them  to  the  church?  We  should  look  this  ques- 
tion sharply  in  the  face,  for  there  are  many  reasons,  because 
of  which  the  Scripture,  such  as  the  churches  and  especially 
the  laity  have  it  in  these  days,  in  itself  falls  short  of  this  cer- 
tainty. In  the  first  place,  as  far  as  we  know,  all  the  autographa 
of  the  books  of  the  Holy  Scripture  have  been  lost,  and  we  have 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  679 

nothing  at  our  disposal  save  incorrect  manuscripts.  Again,  the 
number  of  books  belonging  to  the  New  Testament  has  never 
been  absolutely  and  infallibly  fixed ;  even  in  the  days  of  the 
Reformation  heated  conflicts  were  waged  about  the  canonicity 
of  more  than  one  book.  And,  in  the  third  place,  what  the  or- 
dinary layman  can  have,  is  never  more  than  a  translation  of 
the  original,  to  none  of  which  translation  the  seal  of  infalli- 
bility is  ever  attached.  If  now  with  regard  to  the  Scripture 
the  church  occupied  the  deistical  viewpoint,  that,  after  having 
created  the  word,  the  Holy  Spirit  abandoned  that  Word  to  it- 
self, all  the  benefit  of  the  inspiration  would  be  lost  to  God- 
seeking  souls.  But  this  is  not  the  case.  Diespising  every 
form  of  deism,  the  church  interprets  the  relation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  the  Scripture  in  the  sense  of  a  rich  and  quickening 
theism,  and  the  Reformed  churches  especially,  in  this  also  sur- 
passing the  Lutheran  sister-church,  have  ever  maintained  that 
the  Word  by  itself  never  amounts  to  anything,  and  never  pro- 
duces power  other  than  as  the  instrument  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  hence,  in  all  ages,  has  never  been  abandoned  of  that  Holy 
Spirit.  Her  confession  is,  that  by  revelation  the  Holy  Spirit 
has  prepared  the  material  out  of  which  the  garment  of  the 
Scripture  should  be  woven.  When  that  material  was  pre- 
pared, the  Holy  Spirit  has  inspired  the  individual  pieces  of 
Scripture  in  successive  times.  After  that,  through  the  agency 
of  the  church,  the  Holy  Spirit  has  gathered  the  books  which 
had  been  so  prepared  and  finished.  Furthermore,  the  Spirit 
has  watched  over  the  text  of  the  Word  which  he  had  inspired. 
The  Holy  Spirit  has  no  less  irradiated  the  translations  in 
which  that  Word  was  to  come  to  the  nations.  That  same  Holy 
Spirit  has  ever  afterward  himself  interpreted  that  Word 
through  the  official  preaching,  and  has  mingled  it  with  faith 
in  those  that  are  called  unto  life.     And  with  no  one  of  God's 


680  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

elect  has  the  Holy  Spirit  rested,  until  the  Word,  infallibly  in- 
spired centuries  ago,  bare  fruit  equally  infallible  in  that  soul, 
as  though  it  had  been  inspired  for  the  sake  of  that  soul  alone. 

The  Holy  Spirit  effects  this  purpose  in  two  ways;  which 
as  fides  humana  and  Udes  divina  must  sharply  be  distinguished. 
Fides  humana  which  is  tides,  and  therefore  equally  surely  pro- 
ceeding from  God,  is  the  reliance  which  the  church  places  in 
the  authority  of  the  Spirit's  work  by  means  of  the  organism 
of  the  church,  which  aims  at  the  canon,  the  determining  of  the 
text,  the  translation  and  the  exegesis  of  the  books.  Concern- 
ing each  of  these,  therefore,  a  brief  word. 

What  books  form  the  canon,  is  by  itself  as  unquestionably 
certain  as  it  is  to  the  anatomist,  what  members  do  or  do  not 
belong  to  a  normal  human  body.  The  Scripture  is  an  organ- 
ism. Nothing  can  be  added  to  it  or  taken  away  from  it.  It  is 
complete  in  the  fullness  of  numbers  and  entirety  of  its  parts. 
The  question,  however,  whether  at  each  given  moment  the 
church  is  in  the  possession  of  the  anatomical  tact  which  is 
necessary  with  a  firm  hand  to  decide  upon  each  part  of  the 
Scripture,  or  each  book  that  is  presented  with  this  claim,  must 
be  answered  in  the  negative.  That  certainty  fluctuates  as  the 
waters  of  spiritual  life  in  the  midst  of  the  churches  swell  in 
volume  or  contract.  But  so  far  from  lessening  thereby  the 
confidence  of  the  laity,  the  Holy  Spirit  has  so  disposed  the 
parts  of  Scripture,  that  those  on  which  the  life  depends  have 
never  been  doubted,  and  in  the  books  that  have  never  been 
doubted  the  stream  of  truth  flows  in  all  its  fullness ;  and  sub- 
sequently the  Holy  Spirit  has  directed  also  this  canonical  work 
with  so  firm  a  hand,  that  the  generous  recognition  of  by  far 
the  most  books  astonishes  us  far  more  than  the  continuous 
doubt  expressed  concerning  a  very  few. 

With  respect  to  the  text  of  the  Sacred  Scripture,  the  same 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  G81 

confession  is  in  place.  There  is  no  official  text  in  the  original 
language  for  the  New  Testament,  and  the  textus  receptus  is 
certainly  stripped  of  much  beauty  by  errors.  Of  this,  how- 
ever, we  likewise  confess  that  that  text  has  not  been  abandoned 
to  chance,  but  has  been  watched  over  with  tender  care  by  the 
Holy  Spirit.  It  cannot  be  granted  that,  when  finally,  in  the 
counsel  of  God,  the  great  moment  had  come  in  which,  some 
four  centuries  ago,  the  Word  of  God  was  to  enter  upon  its 
vast  circulation  through  the  press,  the  text  which  was  then 
chosen  under  the  appointment  of  God  can  have  been  an  indif- 
ferent one;  a  most  imperfect  and  an  almost  hopelessly  im- 
paired and  injured  one;  and  it  must  rather  be  confessed  that 
it  is  entitled  to  a  peculiarly  prominent  place  in  the  front  ranks 
on  account  of  its  eminently  historical  significance.  At  the 
hand  of  other  manuscripts  the  textus  receptus  may  and  must 
be  subjected  to  corrections,  but,  disrobed  of  its  spiritual  pref- 
erence, it  never  needs  to  make  room  for  older  witnesses  as  a 
castaway  per  se.  For  myself,  at  least,  I  have  never  felt  the 
logical  stress  of  the  argument,  that  a  manuscript  of  the  fourth 
century,  eo  ipso,  is  a  more  correct  copy  of  the  autographon, 
than  a  manuscript  of  an  early  origin  but  perhaps  following 
an  older  and  therefore  a  purer  text. 

The  direction  of  the  Spirit  also  included  the  translations , 
even  though  it  be  least  of  all  in  absolute  measures.  Consider 
it  well,  that  now  in  the  translations  alone,  and  not  in  the  orig- 
inal, the  Word  exists  for  thousands  who  thirst  after  the  liv- 
ing God,  and  who  without  that  Word  will  never  find  Him. 
Even  literary  men  declare  that  both  Luther's  version  and  the 
Dutch  staten-Bible  are  such  surprising  products  of  sanctified 
genius,  that,  apart  from  a  higher  inspiration,  they  can  scarcely 
be  explained.  Such  translations  by  the  church,  as  the  pillar 
and  ground  of  the  truth,  and  offered  to  the  laity  in  the  very 


6,8?  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct 

prosperous  period  of  her  spiritual  life,  are  for  this  reason  the 
Bible  to  the  people;  to  theologians  indeed  ever  appealable  to 
the  original,  and  never  in  itself  to  be  taken  as  authority,  but 
of  so  great  value  nevertheless  and  of  such  spiritual  signifi- 
cance, that,  under  the  Spirit's  leading,  the  layman  is  entirely 
justified  who  binds  his  conscience  to  this  translation,  and  not 
to  a  text  that  was  foreign  to  him. 

And,  finally,  as  to  the  exegesis  of  the  Scripture,  here  also 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  real  exegete  and,  in  difference  of  opin- 
ion, the  Supremus  Judex.  This  judicature  the  Spirit  exer- 
cises by  laying  out  the  lines  of  the  truth  in  the  confessional 
standards  of  the  churches ;  by  impelling  the  preaching  and  the 
study  of  the  Scripture  in  those  lines;  and  even  when,  in  the 
instrumental  use  of  the  Word,  He  accustoms  the  souls  of  be- 
lievers to  that  fixed  course. 

But,  however  much  this  providence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  may 
be  able  to  quicken  a  fides  hiiniana  in  the  churches,  it  does  not 
finish  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  For  this  human  faith  can 
never  give  absolute  assurance,  and  Calvin  himself  recognized 
that  an  unregenerated  man,  provided  he  is  a  man  of  thought, 
cannot  be  convinced  by  us  of  the  theopneusty  of  the  Scriptures. 
The  semi-somnolent  masses  may  be  held  in  rein  by  ecclesi- 
astical authority,  but  independent,  thoughtful  spirits  never. 
Not  as  though  there  were  separate  rules  for  rich  and  poor,  but 
because,  as  Twesten  correctly  observes,  "  the  absolute  faith 
on  the  divine  character  of  the  Scripture  can  never  rest  other 
than  on  the  immediately  divine  witness."  For  if  human  rea- 
son were  ever  able  to  demonstrate  the  divine,  then  reason 
would  stand  superior  to  the  divine,  and  thus,  eo  ipso,  the  divine 
character  of  the  divine  word  would  be  destroyed. 

However  much  our  fathers  depended  upon  the  theistic  and 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day. 


683 


unceasing  activity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  tlie  Word,  they  have 
never  attributed  any  higher  value  to  the  fides  humana  than  of 
being  a  preparative  and  directing  v^ork,  and  their  real  power 
and  actual  strength  has  never  sprung  from  any  other  source 
than  the  immediate  Witness  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  Witness 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  not  taken  in  the  Lutheran  sense,  as  of 
a  "  Spiritiis  Sanctus  in  ipsa  Scriptura  loquens  et  testiUcans," 
and  much  less  still  in  the  heavy  sense  of  our  present-day  theo- 
logians, as  a  harmony  of  the  reflex  of  the  Spirit  in  us  with  the 
reflex  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Scripture ;  but  a  witness  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  which  is  born,  as  Calvin  puts  it,  when  that  same  God 
the  Holy  Spirit  who  spoke  centuries  ago  through  the  mouth 
of  the  apostles  and  prophets  enters  into  my  heart,  and  by  a 
supranatural  witness  imparts  to  me  the  indisputable  assur- 
ance: I,  God-myself,  have  inspired  this  Scripture,  this  di- 
vine Word. 

This  touches  the  heart  of  the  question.  He  who  has  re- 
ceived that  witness  stands  immovable  as  a  wall.  He  who  has 
not  received  it,  undulates  as  a  wave  of  the  sea.  And  every 
eflFort  of  man  to  replace  this  witness  of  the  Spirit  by  one's 
own  demonstration,  is  sinful,  falls  short  of  the  glory  of  God, 
and  never  accomplishes  its  purpose.  All  children  of  God  re- 
ceive this  witness  at  his  appointed  time,  so  surely,  that  even 
the  ethical  theologians  who  came  to  life,  after  they  had  played 
through  their  entire  repertoire  of  negations,  had  to  come  back 
to  the  church  and  confess  that,  after  all,  "  this  is  the  Word 
of  our  God !  "  And  therefore,  it  is  this  witness  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  which  breaks  the  teeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  all  clerical- 
ism; which,  after  the  removal  of  every  middle-link,  binds  the 
soul  immediately  to  God;  and  thereby  enriches  each  layman 
with  that  invaluable  right  of  spiritual  liberty,  from  which 
heroic  courage,  firmness  of  character,  and  real  love  of  freedom 


684  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

are  born.  This  is  the  fulfillment  of  the  jubilant  prophecy,  that 
a  man  need  no.  more  say  to  his  brother,  "  Know  the  Lord," 
for  that  all  shall  know  him,  even  from  the  least  unto  the  great- 
est. Or,  if  you  please,  call  it  the  holy,  divine,  and  only  real 
equality  which  brings  the  profoundest  scholar  to  his  knees  by 
the  side  of  the  humblest  house-mother,  with  an  assurance  in 
the  heart  which  is  absolutely  similar  and  unmovable. 

But,  and  this  is  our  complaint,  the  newer  Scripture-study 
injures,  likewise,  this  beautifully  ordered  state  of  things.  It 
turns  loose  what  was  fast;  it  lifts  each  piece  of  the  Scripture 
out  of  its  grooves ;  and,  unwilling  and  helpless,  the  laity  are 
delivered  into  the  hands  of  the  men  of  Semitic  and  classical 
studies.  Of  course  nothing  remains  of  the  translation,  and 
youthful  preachers  who  have  scarcely  an  elementary  knowl- 
edge of  the  original  languages  will,  with  appeals  to  the  original 
text,  substitute  the  translation  by  their  own  idea,  until  the 
humble  layman  is  forced  to  exclaim :  "  What  a  wretched  trans- 
lation I  have !  Would  that  I  could  read  Greek  and  Hebrew  my- 
self ! "  But  even  this  is  not  the  end,  misguided  soul ;  for, 
hear  how  they  tell  you  in  all  varieties  of  ways  that  the  original 
text  itself  is  hopelessly  impaired,  even  to  such  an  extent  that 
the  manuscripts  offer  no  sufficient  result,  and  turn  on  turn 
the  conjecture-process  must  be  risked;  and  then, — oh,  the 
height  of  self-conceit,  of  which,  drifting  with  that  stream,  I 
myself  was  guilty, — we  see  young  men  coming  fresh  from  the 
academy  who  deem  themselves  fully  matured  and  justified  to 
train  their  wits  by  practicing  the  art  of  making  conjectures 
at  the  expense  of  the  Holy  Scripture.  And  even  if  that  were 
all.  But  then  the  poor  laity  must  furthermore  be  told  that  this 
narrative  is  a  myth,  and  the  other  has  come  to  us  from 
Parseeism ;  that  not  only  with  respect  to  editorship  but  also 
with  respect  to  the  content,  the  books  of  Moses  are  of  much 


1904.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  685 

later  origin ;  that  the  reports  of  the  creation  and  of  the  fall  are 
sacred  phantasies ;  that  Daniel  was  a  pious  fraud ;  yea,  even 
that  the  word  of  the  apostles  cannot  be  normative,  neither  for 
our  confession  nor  for  the  picture  which  we  form  for  ourselves 
of  the  Lord.  To  all  this  the  laity  must  listen ;  and  when  it  con- 
cerns the  confessional  standard,  they  are  told,  that  God's 
Word,  apart  from  every  formula  of  faith,  is  the  proper  confes- 
sion of  the  Reformed  Church.  And  when  one  asks,  "  Do  you 
mean  by  this  the  Scripture  ?  "  the  answer  runs,  "  No,  but  mere- 
ly God's  word  in  that  Scripture."  And  when  further  it  is  asked, 
"Is  it  what  is  there  recorded  as  God's  word?"  again  the  an- 
swer runs,  "  No,  it  is  not  that.  The  prophets  called  it  so  in  a 
metaphorical  sense,  but  it  was  really  the  product  of  their  own 
thoughts."  And  this  is  what  the  church  of  God  feels  deeply 
hurt  about,  and  against  which  she  rebels  with  all  the  intensity 
of  her  thirst  after  liberty  and  zeal  of  fidelity  to  a  sacred 
charge.  She  smarts  under  it  as  under  the  jeers  that  impugn 
the  seriousness  of  her  heart,  and  as  under  a  game  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  needs  of  her  soul.  It  stings  her  as  the  insult  of  a 
jeering  clericalism,  and  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  she  resents  it. 

For,  though  I  well  know  that  even  thus  the  Holy  Spirit  can 
and  does  work  an  inward  and  certain  witness  in  the  regener- 
ated soul,  by  all  this  the  historic  consciousness  is  weakened; 
— and  moreover,  aside  from  the  regenerated  and  the  redeemed, 
there  are  still  the  children  of  the  churches,  and  it  makes  the 
blood  rush  to  the  face  to  see  how  mercilessly  and  unpardona- 
bly  cruelly  these  vivisectors  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  deal  with 
the  souls  of  our  children. 

For  of  course,  when  the  Scripture  is  open  to  question  as 
they  say  it  is,  a  common  copy  of  our  version  becomes  an  al- 
most worthless  volume ;  the  country-pastor  is  the  only  one  who 
can  explain  it  from  his  books ;  the  Orientalist  and  the  Grsecist 


686  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

become  the  seers  of  our  days,  whom  all  Israel  must  counsel; 
and  the  specialty  in  introduction-studies  becomes  the  High 
Priest  of  a  new-born  church,  before  whose  oracle  the  aston- 
ished masses  bend  their  knees. 

Add  to  this  that,  in  consequence  of  this  all-disintegrating 
criticism,  every  new  preacher  has  other  things  to  proclaim  iti 
the  self-same  congregation;  also,  that  this  theistic,  never-ceas- 
ing activity  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  ignored;  yea,  that  above  all 
else  the  testimony  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  same  way  as  in- 
spiration is  either  weakened  after  the  Lutheran  style,  or  in  the 
Fichtean  sense  is  subjectivated, — and,  in  all  seriousness,  I  ask, 
Is  it  said  too  much,  is  it  spoken  too  crassly,  when,  after  having 
exhibited  this  vivisection  that  has  presumptuously  been  applied 
to  the  Scripture,  as  the  corruptor  of  our  theology  and  the  an- 
nihilator  of  the  Bible,  I  at  length  no  less  seriously  brand  it  as 
an  avenue  to  clericalism ;  and  that  therefore,  as  a  free-born  son 
of  a  nation  which  purchased  its  liberty  from  Spain  and  on  the 
ground  of  this  Testimony  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  I  protest  against 
this  violation  of  the  right  of  the  churches  and  this  injury 
worked  against  the  liberty  of  the  laity? 

I  have  come  to  the  end  of  my  task,  and  my  threefold  pro- 
test against  the  biblical  criticism  of  the  present  day  has  been 
entered.  I  find  no  fault  with  what  is  done  by  those  who  are 
outside,  nor  with  what  has  been  done  by  any  in  the  capacity 
of  Semitic  philologians.  But  I  deplore  that  in  the  domain  of 
the  church  of  Christ,  and  in  the  very  temple  of  the  sacred  the- 
ology, the  Holy  Scripture  has  been  so  roughly  handled  by 
those  who  profess  themselves  to  be  Christian  theologians,  that 
at  their  hand  the  Holy  Bible  has  been  recklessly  and  unspar- 
ingly carved  and  torn  loose  in  its  several  parts,  and  has  had 
its  organism  remodeled  after  philosophical  hypotheses.  I  think 


11)01.]  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  687 

I  have  shown  with  logical  accuracy  both  the  encyclopedic,  dog- 
matic, and  ecclesiastical  ruin  which  this  critical  vandalism  has 
perpetrated,  and,  that  I  might  shun  the  very  appearance  of 
spiritual  cowardice,  I  have  boldly  and  candidly  set  over- 
against  this  my  own  confession  respecting  the  Holy  Scripture. 
I  did  this  in  the  still  consciousness  that,  with  no  cover  or 
fingers  over  my  eyes,  I  looked  the  criticism  squarely  in  the 
face;  condoned  and  mollified  nothing;  and  that  with  an  hon- 
est, scientific  conscience  I  stand  immovably  firm  in  the  confes- 
sion of  the  inspiration  by  the  Spirit,  I  am  quite  prepared  that 
this  will  occasion  surprise  with  one,  bitterness  with  another; 
but  why  should  I  be  denied  the  right  to  speak,  when  it  has 
come  to  this  pass,  that  even  they  who  confess  the  name  of  Je- 
sus offer  the  incense  of  approbation  to  the  most  radical  anato- 
mists of  the  Scripture  ?  God  the  Lord  has  granted  me  the  cour- 
age of  my  conviction,  and  though  this  conviction  may  seem  ut- 
ter foolishness  to  our  modern  Greeks,  and  to  our  ethical  Israel 
a  stone  of  offense,  I  hold  myself  fast  to  it,  even  as  all  the  dear 
people  of  God  have  embraced  it  these  nineteen  centuries,  as 
"  the  Power  of  God,"  a  power  given  us  of  God  not  for  the 
pleasing  of  our  pride,  but  for  the  making  sure  of  our  salva- 
tion. 

And  if  with  this  I  take  my  departure  both  from  my  modern 
and  ethical  opponents,  I  say  to  the  moderns  among  my  critics, 
"  Even  though,  as  it  seems  to  me,  you  wander  and  err,  yet  with 
you  there  is  logical  consistency ;  for,  as  you  say,  the  Scripture 
is  a  scripture  like  other  books,  entirely  human  of  origin ;  and 
therefore  there  is  no  inspiration  either,  no  more  regard  for  the 
elect  who  call  for  certainty,  and  the  whole  sancta  theologia  is 
metamorphosed  into  the  science  of  religion."  To  the  ethicals, 
on  the  other  hand,  who,  because  they  still  confess  the  holy 
name  of  the  Lord,  are  still  my  brethren ;  to  them  I  say :  "  Smelt 


688  Biblical  Criticism  of  the  Present  Day.  [Oct. 

away  the  philosophical  alloy  from  the  pure  gold  which  still 
hides  in  the  kernel  of  your  faith.  Be  done  with  that  limping 
on  two  mutually  excluding  principles.  Choose  once  more  a 
form  that  will  suit  the  glorious  life  in  which  you  also  desire 
to  lave  and  satisfy  your  soul.  Above  all,  have  pity,  have 
mercy,  upon  those  who  are  deeply  hurt,  because  they  are  the 
church  of  the  living  God."  And  if  the  younger  among  them 
were  to  ask,  if  then  they  must  violate  their  insight  and  do  vio- 
lence to  their  scientific  conscience,  I  would  answer,  "  No ;  never 
do  that.  It  is  never  safe  to  do  anything  against  the  conscience, 
and  no  difficulties  of  conscience  m.ay  ever  be  called  con- 
quered before  they  are  conquered  indeed.  But  if  you  would 
do  violence,  if  you  would  try  your  strength  against  something, 
oh,  then,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  let  me  urge  you  to  do  vio- 
lence indeed  against  the  highness  of  our  human  thinking, 
cast  your  biblical  criticism,  and  not  the  Bible,  into  the  melting- 
pot,  and,  as  theologians,  and  as  shepherds  of  the  flocks,  cease 
from  aspiring  to  be  anything  else,  or  anything  higher  than 
small  in  your  own  wisdom  and  correspondingly  more  richly 
endued  instruments  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 


fiiiiiii 


Date  Due 

^   _^ 

cl.««^ 

i» 

J^ 

•'  ^^m,,^ 

^-^ 

?•  '  '^  ■" " 

tmmmm^ 

Mii». 

'tif<-4£a^ 

BiifniifiiiRiit 

<|) 

Gaylord  Bros. 

Makers 
Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

PAT.  IAN.  21.  1908 


f'"""'""   Theological  Sem.nary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01057  1422 


